Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23134 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-718 Year-2021 Thana- NATHNAGAR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== RANJIT KUMAR son of Bijay Kumar Sharma Resident of Village - Karela, Police Station - Madhusudanpur, District - Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Syed Masleh Uddin Ashraf, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 11-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, it is stated by the informant that the petitioner sexually exploited her for about four years and also threatened to kill her.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The informant is a married lady. From the allegations in the F.I.R it appears that the relations between the parties were consensual. The petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2021 and has no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions relies on the orders of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23134 of 2022(3) dt.11-01-2023 2/2 Honourable Supreme Court dated 14.7.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal no. 962 of 2022 (Ansaar Mohammad Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) and order dated 27.7.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal no. 442 of 2022 (Mandar Deepak Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.) The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that the informant has supported her allegations in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation, the informant being a minor on the date from which the alleged sexual exploitation by the petitioner commenced ie 4 years before the registering of the F.I.R. together with the informant having supported the case in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) shiv/- U T