Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61320/2017rejected

Nandan Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

2018-03-14Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.61320 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -49 Year- 2017 Thana -DANDARI District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Nandan Tanti S/o Late Pongal Tanti @ Ramatar Tanti, R/o VillageMohabba, P.S.- Dandari, District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner, allegedly, ravished to the daughter of the informant in her presence as well as in the presence of covillager Shambhu Thakur. Submission is that the petitioner is in custody since 21.08.2017. Though the victim has supported the allegation in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. but she was noticed not mentally well. Therefore, it is yet to be decided whether her statement would be considered or not. Moreover, the Doctor has not found any sign of recent physical assault.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.61320 of 2017 (5) dt.14-03-2018 2/2 Submission of the learned counsel for the State is that both the eye-witnesses have supported the allegation before the police.

Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present in connection with Dandari Police Station Case No. 49 of 2017 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

Hence, prayer for bail is refused.

Let the learned trial court expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- U T