Ritik Raushan @ Golu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49003 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2023 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ritik Raushan @ Golu Son of Radheshyam Singh R/o Village - Nayanagar Dularpur, P.S.- Teghra, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-09-2024 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Teghra P.S. Case No. 380 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 354, 376, 323, 325 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the I.T. Act.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that before marriage, the petitioner by alleging the informant had established physical relationship with her and after obtaining some objectionable video and photographs, she was subjected to sexual exploitation on and off. It is further alleged that irrespective of the fact that when the marriage of the
2/4 informant had solemnized, she was being threatened, and on 10.12.2023, while she was returning along with her husband after attending a marriage, all the FIR named accused persons, including the petitioner intercepted them and assaulted, due to which the husband of the informant and her brother have sustained injuries. It is also alleged that accused persons have ransacked the house of the informant.
4. Learned Advocate for petitioner contended that even as per the narrations made in the FIR, it would be evident that both the parties were in relationship since 2016, but surprisingly, the present FIR has been instituted in the year 2023. Even as per the age of the petitioner as disclosed in the FIR, before eight years, he was only 13 years and, as such, the entire allegation appears to be concocted. The police has not found the allegation of ransacking the house of the informant true. During the course of investigation, though the informant has alleged that some objectionable photographs and video has been obtained, but neither it has been disclosed nor it has been brought as to what kind of photographs was there. It is lastly contended that, be that as it may, now the petitioner is a man of fair antecedent and he has been incarcerated since 07.05.2024.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State
3/4 vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the allegation is serious in nature and the victim was subjected to sexual exploitation on the threat of making her objectionable photographs viral.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature of allegation and the submissions made at the bar on behalf of the petitioner, coupled with the fair antecedent and the period of custody, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Teghra P.S. Case No. 380 of 2019, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:- (i) The petitioner with mark his appearance before the local Police Station on first week of every month, till framing of the charge.
(ii) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.
(iii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.
4/4 (iv) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial. (v) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.
(vi) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.
(Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U T