Raju Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29171 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2016 Thana- BIKRAM District- Patna ====================================================== Raju Ram Son of Bhagwan Ram @ Bangali Ram Resident of Village - Arap, P.S.- Bikram, Distt - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case initially registered under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code but after investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Sections 366(A), 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of POCSO Act..

Prosecution case in short is that while the informant's daughter had gone to attend call of nature, she was taken away by the accused persons. It is also alleged that she was confined in a room for a month and was ravished by the accused.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 22-10-2016. Charge sheet has already been submitted. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29171 of 2019(4) dt.17-08-2019 2/2 case. During trial, three prosecution witnesses have been declared hostile. There is no chance of the trial being concluded in near future. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R. In course of trial, the victim was examined, in which, she supported the allegation made in the FIR. A report was called for. From perusal of the report, it appears that four prosecution witnesses have already been examined. The trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six months. Considering the nature of allegation and stage of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Bikram P.S. Case No. 207 of 2016 is rejected.

The trial court is directed to take all possible steps to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of the order. (Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T