Dabloo Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32819 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2022 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Dabloo Singh, son of Late Kashi Singh, resident of village Murtiya, Police Station- Adapur, District East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 02-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conferencing in view of the COVID 19.

Let the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office be removed within four weeks.

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Adapur (Nakardei) P.S. Case No. 84/2022 for the offences under Sections 376,313 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6, 8 and12 of the POCSO Act.

As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that she came in contact of Dablu Singh (the petitioner herein), who took her to Chandni Musical Orchestra, Adapur. It is further alleged that the petitioner always forced her to dance and when informant refused to do so, the petitioner assaulted her. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32819 of 2022(2) dt.02-09-2022 2/2 further alleged that later the petitioner on the pretext of marriage and money, got her ready to dance in Orchestra. After some days, the petitioner solemnized marriage with the informant by putting vermilion on her forehead and also made physical relationship with her and when she became pregnant, the petitioner destroyed the foetus of the informant by giving her medicine. It is further alleged that on 10.02.2002, the informant asked some money from the petitioner but not only he refused to give any money she was also assaulted. The Informant further alleged that the petitioner had married two other girls also. Considering the fact that the lady had been allegedly raped by this petitioner and the same is repetitive in nature as also the fact that the Medical Board has opined her to be a minor, this Court for the present is not inclined to grant him privilege of bail which is accordingly rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U T