Raushan Das @ Raushan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48736 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2024 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Raushan Das @ Raushan Son of Nathuni Das Resident of Village - Dalwar, P.S.- Khajauli, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Paroo Devi Wife of Ramsewak Das Resident of Village - Datuwar, Ward No.- 13, P.S.- Khajauli, District - Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 18-09-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable in connection with Khajauli P.S. Case No.1 of 2024 under Sections 341, 323, 354B, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 8/4 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against four named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation that the petitioner used to torture the informant's daughter and tried to outrage her modesty.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48736 of 2024(3) dt.18-09-2024 2/2
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and the allegation is general and omnibus.
5. Learned Counsel also submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean. He further submits that the case diary has been called for.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the victim is a minor girl and. From the case diary, it become clear that the petitioner used to torture her.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, therefore the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T