Guddar Mishra @ Gangadhar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54264 of 2016 (2) dt.21-12-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54264 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -105 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Guddar Mishra @ Gangadhar Mishra Son of late Shivchandra Mishra Resident of Village- Janar, P.S.- Aurai, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 21-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 105 of 2016 registered under Sections 376(ii)(i) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 and 21 of the POSCO Act.

The accusation is that minor daughter of informant, Punam Devi and minor daughter of one Shambhu Saran Singh had gone to the field to graze the she-goat then Harichandra Sah took both the girls to his house and committed rape. When the informant came to know about the occurrence to her daughter she met to husband of Mukhiya and petitioner, husband of Surpanch then they arranged the meeting in the house with son of Harichandra Sah and one Advocate. After meeting, petitioners and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54264 of 2016 (2) dt.21-12-2016 others asked the informant and Sambhu Saran Singh to receive cash of Rs.41,000/- as compensation as their will be no result in lodging the case but the informant refused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would appear from the F.I.R. that the allegation of committing rape on both minor girls is against Harichandra Sah. Only allegation against petitioner and one Raju Mishra husband of Mukhia is that after panchayat they asked for payment of compensation by Harichandra Sah to the guardian of both victim, minor girls, except that there is nothing against the petitioner and Raju Mishra.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Ist Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpeical Judge, POSCO, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 105 of 2016, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T