Lalan Rai @ Lalan Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27826 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Lalan Rai @ Lalan Ray, aged about 40 years, Female, S/o Rampravesh Rai, R/o Village- Nagargawan, P.S.- Raghopur, Distt- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Priyanshu Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned senior counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 278 of 2024 dated 01.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 75, 76, 79, 308(3) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 66C and 66D of the I.T. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 12.05.2024 at about 5.00 P.M., when the informant alongwith Rs. 30,000/- was going to her house from Paharpur Chauk, then Laalan Rai (petitioner) and the other co-accused persons, namely, Rahul Kumar, Bechan Rai and two other persons who were covered

2/5 their faces with Gamacha and in drunken state, took her in the maize field and started molesting her and made a video and also tore her clothes. When she raised hulla, Laalan Rai (petitioner) pressed her mouth with her clothes and all the accused persons took her in the house of Laalan Rai (petitioner) and tried to establish physical relationship with her and made a video.

It is further alleged that on her hue and cry the co-accused, Ramsagar Rai abused her and told that everything is finished, her obscene video has also been made and told the informant to go to her home by giving her torn clothes and also threatened that if the matter was reported to anybody or the police, her obscene video would be made viral on social media and her son and husband would be killed and false case would be filed against her as the officer-in-charge of Raghopur Police Station is his own man. It is further alleged that when the police came, the co-accused Ramsagar Rai returned back the police by saying that nothing happened here. When she went to the Raghopur Police Station to lodge the case then the officer-in-charge refused to lodge the case against the accused persons.

When she went to the Hospital for her medical, she was also refused for medical by the staff of the hospital.

3/5 mobile of the brother-in-law (Dewar) of the informant that if the matter is reported to anyone, the case of kidnapping would be lodged against the brother-in-law (Dewar) of the informant. It is further alleged that on 10.09.2024 Laalan Rai (petitioner) demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- from the informant and told her that if the same amount would not be paid within a period of two days, her obscene video would be made viral on the social media. It is further alleged that when the informant did not pay Rs. 1,00,000/- to Laalan Rai (petitioner), then he made her obscene video viral from his facebook and other account from 15.09.2024 to 24.09.2024. The informant has a screenshot photo and video of that.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. It is further submitted that the alleged occurrence took place on 12.05.2024 as to when the F.I.R. has been lodged on 01.10.2024 and for the delay of five months and twenty two days in lodging of the F.I.R. no explanation has been given by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the informant never filed any complaint/F.I.R. before the competent authority since May, 2024 to September, 2024 and the present false case has been filed by the informant

4/5 an afterthought. It is further submitted that the informant is an illiterate lady, who has not signed on the fardbeyan rather she put her thumb impression on the representation filed before the Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur and the Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur without any preliminary inquiry gave direction on the same day to the S.H.O., Raghopur Police Station to register an F.I.R. which is bad in law. The victim was not medically examined by the doctor. There is no eye witness or independent eye witness to the alleged offence to substantiate the case of the prosecution. The petitioner was not present on the alleged date and time of occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence.

The charge sheet has already been submitted against the petitioner. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the other co-accused person, namely, Ramsagar Rai, has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 4310 of 2025 vide order dated 27.02.2025, annexed as Annexure- P/2 to the present bail application. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition. He is in custody in this case since 22.11.2024.

5/5

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned senior counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XV, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 278 of 2024 with further condition:- (I) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) U.K./- U T