Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23158/2020dismissed

Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-11-23Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23158 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-867 Year-2019 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Sudhanshu Kumar S/O Shashi Ranjan Singh Resident Of Mohalla-Krishna Mohan Nagar, Road No.3, Paithan Toli, P.S.-Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Suman Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Umanath Mishra, Addl Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner seeks bail in Kanti Police Station Case No. 867 of 2019 (Trial No.39/2020) registered for the offences punishable under sections 354A/354D of the Indian Penal Code and sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

The informant alleges that the petitioner riding his Pulsar motorcycle used to follow his daughter on way to her Coaching Class. He also used to utter filthy language to the victim and her father and even tried to molest the victim as well. On complaint, parents of the petitioner did not pay heed on the conduct of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity. Earlier father of the petitioner had filed Kanti Police Station Case No. 280.2017 against the father and uncle of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23158 of 2020(4) dt.23-11-2020 2/2 the informant. Charge sheet has also been filed in the case. Petitioner is in custody since 25.2.2020.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the victim in her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement has supported the prosecution case. Petitioner has criminal antecedent of similar nature.

In view of the nature as well as the gravity of the offence alleged in the FIR, prayer for bail of the petitioner is refused.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T