Mithalesh Ray @ Mithalesh Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36665 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2024 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Mithalesh Ray @ Mithalesh Kumar Ray S/O Late Anudeep Ray, R/O VillLawapur, P.S- Mahnar, Distt.- Vaishali, Pin- 844506. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Prity Kumari D/O Baudha Turiya, R/O Vill- Turiya, P.S- Kaua Khor, Distt.- Nawada.

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, Advocate Ms. Misha Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-10-2024 Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Usha Kumari 1, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahnar PS Case No. 53 of 2024, FIR dated 09.03.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 511 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act and under Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST Act, 2014 and also under Section 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST Act, 1989.

3.

According to the prosecution case, the petitioner locked the informant in the office of Chimney, attempted to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36665 of 2024(4) dt.26-10-2024 2/3 molest her and also forced her to marry him. It is further alleged that the petitioner took informant's father with him and thereafter her father remains traceless.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that upon perusal of the FIR, it appears that no such occurrence has taken place and the petitioner just tried to commit rape upon the victim.

5.

The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand on the basis of materials available on record and case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the informant was working with the petitioner and according to paragraph no. 79 of the case diary, it is evident that petitioner has locked the door and tried to commit rape upon the informant. In addition to that, in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., she has fully supported the case of the prosecution. Additionally, the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one, however, she fairly submits that petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36665 of 2024(4) dt.26-10-2024 3/3 and the nature of allegation as well as the materials available on record which has come during investigation, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Mahnar PS Case No. 53 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Additional Session Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge POCSO, Hazipur, Vaishali.

7.

Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T