Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38526/2024dismissed

Sanoj Rai @ Sanoj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-06-21Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38526 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2015 Thana- ISUAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Sanoj Rai @ Sanoj Kumar Yadav S/o- Munshi Ray R/o- Usari Biharichak PsIsuapur Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20842 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2015 Thana- ISUAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Chhotu Singh @ Manish Singh @ Mohit Kumar S/o Braj Kishor Singh R/o vill - Gaura, P.s. - Madhoura (Goura O.P.), Distt. - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 38526 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Krishna Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20842 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tej Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Isuapur P.S. Case No. 66 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(a)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, the petitioners Sanoj Rai and Chhotu

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38526 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 2/3 Singh along with co-accused Baleshwar Rai and Manoj Kumar forcibly got seated the minor daughter of the informant of motorcycle and they fled away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sanoj Kumar has submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 164 of CrPC did not made allegation of committing misdeed against him rather such allegation is only against Chotu and co-accused Manoj Kumar. Learned counsel has also submitted that there was land dispute between the family members of the victim and the petitioner.

5. The victim in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC has specifically stated that Manoj Rai, Sanoj Rai (petitioner), Baleshwar Rai and Chhotu Singh (petitioner) forcibly lifted her from her house. Manoj and Chhotu committed misdeed for several occasion with the victim. The petitioner Sanoj Rai and co-accused Manoj had kept the victim for one and a half year and thereafter, they brought her near a temple and they went therefrom after leaving her.

6. The statement of the victim transpires itself that the name of the accused persons including the petitioners have figured in the statement under Section 164 of CrPC. There is specific allegation in the statement under Section 164 of CrPC that the petitioner Chotu and co-accused Manoj committed misdeed with her for several times and petitioner Sanoj and co-accused Manoj had kept the victim for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38526 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 3/3 one and half year.

7. In my view, the petitioners do not deserve the privilege for bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T