Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21519/2023rejected

Sandeep Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-13Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21519 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-418 Year-2022 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== SANDEEP SAH SON OF MAINEJAR SAH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PIYARAUTA, P.S. - BHORE, DISTT. - GOPALGANJ ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-07-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.08.2022 in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No.418/2022, dated 27.08.2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 DA of the IPC & Sections 4/6 of POCSO Act.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons are alleged to have committed rape upon the informant one by one.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21519 of 2023(3) dt.13-07-2023 2/2 He further submits that the alleged date of occurrence is 24.05.2022 but the present F.I.R. has been instituted on 27.08.2022, after lapse of three days and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is not supported by the medical evidence.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand on the basis of material available on record and the case diary vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she has categorically stated that the petitioner and other co-accused persons have committed rape upon her and the medical report also supports the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No.418/2022, pending in the court of learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Gopalganj.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) amit/- U T