Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30565/2024bail rejected

Rohan Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-26Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30565 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== ROHAN KUMAR @ RAKESH KUMAR SON OF AIRUNI DAS @ ARUN DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PACHAM, P.S. - KIUL, DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

REKHA KUMARI DAUGHTER OF DHARMENDRA DAS @ SHYAM DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PACHAM, P.S. - KIUL, DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 26-07-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case no.92 of 2023 registered under sections 376, 341, 323, 452, 354(b), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the petitioner committed rape on her.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Though chargesheet has been submitted under POCSO Act besides other sections, it was a case of love affair between the parties and the relationship between them was consensual.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30565 of 2024(3) dt.26-07-2024 2/2 Subsequently, the alleged victim got married and the parties have entered into a compromise vide compromise petition brought on record as Annexure-2. The petitioner is in custody since 27.9.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. Learned counsel for the informant appears and submits that yes the parties have entered into a compromise.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. together with the chargesheet having been submitted under the POCSO Act, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U