Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24499/2022rejected

Sanjeev Sharma @ Sanjeev Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2022-09-01Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24499 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2020 Thana- KADWA District- Katihar ====================================================== Sanjeev Sharma @ Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, S/o Mauji Sharma R/o VillageSanjhauli, P.S.- Kadwa, District- Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Sah @ Baranwal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 01-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Kadwa P.S. Case No.287/2020 instituted under Sections 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the informant's minor daughter was sitting in the shop and the informant had gone to attend the call of nature. When he returned, he could not find his daughter in the shop. He was further informed that his daughter has been abducted by the petitioner herein. Accordingly, she apprehended that he may be sexually abused and or killed by the present petitioner.

In this case, case diary was called for on 04.08.2022

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24499 of 2022(3) dt.01-09-2022 2/2 and the same has been received.

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State with the support of the medical examination of the victim girl by the Medical Board has submitted that the Board has opined her age to be 17 years and as such she was minor. Further as per the statement made by the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C has supported the allegation of rape against the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is not inclined to grant him privilege of bail, which is accordingly rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /- U T