Nikhil Kumar @ Nikhil Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25080 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-958 Year-2018 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Nikhil Kumar @ Nikhil Singh aged about 19 years S/o Braj Kishor Singh R/o Village- Kasmar Kharika, P.S.- Sonepur, District- Saran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Rina Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Addl Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State via Video Conferencing.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in Sonepur Police Station Case No. 958 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution's case in brief is that the informant's minor daughter was missing on 19.9.2018 at 7 pm and on enquiry the informant learnt that she left the house along with Aadhar card, ornaments and cash of Rs.7000/-. Earlier also she had been kidnapped by one Satish Chandrayan for which Sonepur Police Station case no. 359/2018 had been registered. It is stated that when the victim was recovered in the instant case, in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. she alleged that the petitioner committed sexual assault on her.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the victim was recovered from the Sonepur railway station and same day her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement was recorded. In course of medical examination dated 3.1.2019 her age has been found to be 18 years. The doctor has also opined that 'there is no any evidence of recent sexual intercourse and also there is no injury on her private part'. Besides, the victim has not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25080 of 2020(3) dt.06-11-2020 2/2 disclosed that when and where the petitioner committed such offence with her. In the earlier case (Sonepur Police Station Case No. 359/2018), police submitted final form. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. He states that the Vitim has made specific allegation against the petitioner in her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement. Considering the gravity of the allegation against the petitioner, his prayer for bail is refused with direction to surrender and seek regular bail which would be considered and disposed of on its own merit without prejudice. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T