Rajkumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40484 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2021 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rajkumar Chaudhary Son Of Chandi Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Balua Rampurwa, P.S.- Bairiya, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 04-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and perused the case diary. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 312 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Allegedly, the victim, who is minor daughter of the informant, in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C has alleged that the petitioner and one another took her at about 8 P.M. and committed wrong with her and also the petitioner got abortion of her pregnancy.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the medical report does not support the allegation made against the petitioner. He further submits that she did not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40484 of 2022(3) dt.04-01-2023 2/2 make any complaint against the petitioner during the period of three months while she lived with the petitioner. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail and submitted that there is specific allegation of overt-act and having sexual relation with the victim who is a minor.
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial expeditiously.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T