Surendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33060 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Surendra Ray Son Of Ram Pratap @ Ram Patap Ray Resident Of VillageBishunpur Keso, Ps- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Hari Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 31-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 30 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 342, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Later on, charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 341, 342, 376, 506 and 34 of IPC, Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(2) (va) of the SC/ST Act.

Allegation against the petitioner along with other coaccused person is that they committed rape upon the informant forcefully who is aged about 16 years after taking her behind litchi orchard. It is further alleged that they threatened her of dire consequences.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33060 of 2023(3) dt.31-07-2023 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this present case due to village politics. It is further submitted that petitioner being the friend of the co-accused person, he has been dragged in this case. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 13.05.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the statement of the victim who is aged about 16 years was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., who is informant herself in this case stated that the petitioner along with other co-accused person committed rape with her one by one forcefully on the point of knife. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T