Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20918 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2019 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga ====================================================== SANJAY YADAV Son of Sogarath Yadav Resident of Village - Atarbel Chowk, P.S.- Singhwara, District - Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.J.K.Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 13-10-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conference. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that all defects pointed out by the stamp reporter shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one month thereof. Learned counsel for the State states that he has no objection in this regard and the matter be taken up on merits in view of the stated urgency.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 28.02.2020 in connection with Jale P.S.Case No. 200 of 2019 for the alleged offences under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently Section 376 IPC was added.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20918 of 2020(4) dt.13-10-2020 2/3

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with kidnapping of the daughter-in-law of the informant. It is submitted that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and the thrust of accusation is against coaccused Rakesh Kumar Yadav. The petitioner's name has been added in course of investigation, however no specific role has been assigned to him. It is submitted that the victim girl was earlier married to one Pintu Jha and she subsequently married Deepak Choudhary. The petitioner has already suffered more than seven months in custody and claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP invites reference to paragraph 24 of the case diary in which the deposition of the victim girl has been recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. She has made specific allegation against the petitioner of having administered drug and established physical relationship with her.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para 1

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20918 of 2020(4) dt.13-10-2020 3/3 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) HR/- U T