Anil Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.993 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -155 Year- 2015 Thana -MANIHARI District- KATIHAR ====================================================== Anil Mahto, son of Raj Kumar Mahto, resident of Village- Naya Tola, Ward No.2, Police Station- Manihari, District- Katihar. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

The appellant seeks regular bail in connection with Manihari P.S.Case No. 155 of 2015, G.R.Case No. 3181 of 2015 registered for offences punishable under Sections 458 and 354(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(xii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

The allegation against the appellant is of taking the minor daughter of the informant and trying to outrage her modesty and there are some other allegations also against the appellant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the whole prosecution case is false and concocted as the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.993 of 2017 (5) dt.17-05-2017 2/2 prosecution story itself appears to be improbable and the appellant is in custody for eight months.

Heard learned Spl. P. P. who has opposed the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

However, the appellant is in custody for eight months as such the learned Special Court is directed to expedite the trial of the appellant and try to conclude the same within seven months. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the appellant shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

With the aforesaid observation, this appeal is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) S.Pandey/- U T