Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42232/2016dismissed

Naim Ansari @ Nayeem Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-20Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42232 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -55 Year- 2016 Thana -ASAWAN District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Naim Ansari @ Nayeem Ansari Son of Nek Mohammad Ansari Resident of Village- Bardahan, Police Station- Asaon, District Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

The application is for grant of bail in connection with Assaon PS case no. 55 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 376, 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 6/8 of POCSO Act. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that in this case though the girl was present in the police station at the time of lodging of FIR but the case has been lodged by the father of the victim. Secondly, no statement of girl had been recorded at that very stage rather her statement under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been recorded after 25 days of occurrence. It is further submitted that medical report does not show sign of rape on the victim and petitioner is in custody for about 07

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42232 of 2016 (7) dt.20-01-2017 2/2 months. As a matter of fact, the petitioner has been implicated in this case as a piece of land was situated in front of the house of informant but the same is purchased by the petitioner, hence, false and concocted case has been filed against the petitioner. Heard learned A.P.P. also. Learned Having heard both sides. In view of the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner and even the victim, in her statement under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure has supported the case of the prosecution, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail though he is in custody for about 07 months. As such, bail application of the petitioner is rejected. However, learned court below is directed to expedite the trial of the case.

With these observations, this bail application is dismissed.

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