Pankaj Sada @ Dhokla v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.50106 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -90 Year- 2016 Thana -NAUHATTA District- SAHARSA ====================================================== Pankaj Sada @ Dhokla Son of Late Sita Ram Sada Resident of Mohalla - Nauhatta, Tola - Angrejipar, P.S. - Nauhatta, District - Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 16-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 31.05.2016 in connection with POCSO Case No. 21 of 2016, Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 90 of 2016 pending in the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Saharsa registered for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution case is that petitioner took away informant's daughter in a lonely place and pushed his finger into her vagina, as a result of which blood was oozing from her vagina.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50106 of 2016 (3) dt.16-12-2016 2/2 petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to previous enmity. It is further submitted that he has no criminal history and that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence. However, learned A.P.P. for the State submits that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report and the mother of the victim girl, Chandni Praveen had seen the occurrence, hence, opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the parties, since the allegation against the petitioner is of heinous nature and that blood was oozing out from vagina of the victim girl and the victim girl has recognized the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T