Pramod Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37900 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2015 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Vaishali ====================================================== PRAMOD SAHNI Son of Mauje Lal Sahni Resident of village - Haribanshpur, P.S. - Bhagwanpur, Distt .- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Satya Prakash Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 10-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 366A, 376, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per FIR, the informant alleged that the petitioner and co-accused persons abducted her daughter due to ulterior motives. It is further alleged that victim recovered and alleged that the petitioner committed rape with her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this present case merely on the basis of suspicion. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37900 of 2023(4) dt.10-10-2023 2/2 submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 16.11.2022.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and he abducted minor daughter of the informant and committed rape with her. As per Para-3, of the Case Diary, wherein victim has stated that the petitioner and co-accused persons abducted her and kept her in a rented room and forcibly established physical relation with her. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape with the victim, 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