Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18136/2017dismissed

Pranav Kumar @ Parnab Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-11Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18136 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -237 Year- 2014 Thana -SURYAGARHA District- LAKHISARAI ======================================================

1. Pranav Kumar @ Parnab Kumar Son of Ghina Mahto@ Narayan Mahto Resident of Village- Manikpur, Navtoliya , P.S. Surgagarha (Manikpur), District- Lakhisarai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar For Informant : Mr. R. Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-05-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Suryagarh (Manikpur) P.S. Case No. 237 of 2014, registered for offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376 (2)G and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner that he along with others kidnapped the victim girl and committed rape on her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and falsity of the case will appear from the fact that medical report does not show any sign of rape. Further during the supervision, villagers have come forward, who also not have supported the case of prosecution and also final form in this case has been submitted not finding the allegations

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18136 of 2017 (3) dt.11-05-2017 2/2 true against the petitioner, however, learned Magistrate differing with the opinion of police, took cognizance against the petitioner. and petitioner has been in custody since 12.02.2017. Heard learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides, from perusal of the F.I.R and other records, it appears that there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he along with one other kidnapped the victim girl and committed rape on her and the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated about the occurrence, as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it as early as possible, preferably within a period of one year.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T