← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45203/2017dismissed

Ravi Ravani @ Kallu v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-07Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45203 of 2017 (3) dt.07-11-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45203 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -105 Year- 2016 Thana -SAHAR District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Ravi Ravani @ Kallu Son of Ram Niwas Rawani, resident of VillageEkbari, Police Station- Sahar, District- Bhojpur (Ara). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Govind Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-11-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 36 of 2016, arising out of Sahar P.S. Case No. 105 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 366A/376 of Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is of kidnapping the minor daughter of the informant and committing rape on her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that out and out false and concocted case has been lodged, which will appear from the fact that she was living with the petitioner for a month in Panipat and, thereafter, she was brought back to the house and father of the prosecutrix has taken her, which clearly shows that the girl was a consenting party and the medical report also shows that she was aged about 19 years. Further petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45203 of 2017 (3) dt.07-11-2017 has been in judicial custody since 16.12.2016. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Having heard both sides, considering the fact and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, 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 within a period of six months. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T