Dr. Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33207 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2020 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== DR. VINOD KUMAR @ VINOD KUMAR SAH S/o Late Raghubir Sah R/o village- Hathaura, P.S.- Sussainganj, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of start of normal functioning of the physical court.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution case, the informant in his written report stating therein that petitioner runs a clinic in the house of informant since 1 year where two girls were compounder and his girl often visited the clinic on 02.10.2020 his daughter Mamta Kumari said that she is going to the market for purchasing the clothes but she did not return back and when

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33207 of 2021(5) dt.04-04-2022 2/3 she was called her mobile was switched off and on enquiry informant learnt that petitioner is also not coming at the clinic and when he was contacted then he started talking rubbish, anyhow on the mobile of Dr. Vinod Kumar informant talked with his girl but later on the same mobile was also switched off informant suspected that on the pretext of providing job his daughter was kidnapped by the Dr. Vinod Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. that the victim girl out of her sweet will accompanied with the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on the basis of material available on the record as well as case diary and submits that the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 268 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Siwan.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33207 of 2021(5) dt.04-04-2022 3/3 Prayer is refused.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

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