Amit Kumar @ Amit Sehra @ Amit Shera v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39471 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda ====================================================== AMIT KUMAR @ AMIT SEHRA @ AMIT SHERA Son of Feku Ravidas @ Fekan Ravidas Resident of Village - Shahpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District - Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar

2. Hemanti Devi, Wife of Akhileshwar Kewat, Resident of Village-Dihara, P.S. Chandi, District-Nalanda.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== 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, 363, 376, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per FIR, the informant alleged that the petitioner and co-accused persons abducted her minor daughter due to ulterior motives.

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.39471 of 2023(6) dt.10-10-2023 2/2 submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 19.03.2023.

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 daughter of the informant and committed rape with her. As per Para-53, of the Case Diary, wherein victim has stated that the petitioner enticed away her and took her to Mumbai and kept her in a rented room and many times 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