Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44161/2022rejected

Surendra Das v. The State Of Bihar

2023-02-01Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44161 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-231 Year-2020 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== SURENDRA DAS S/O NAGENDRA DAS R/o Village- Barhet, PostKujeshar, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 01-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 147 of 2020 arising out of Imamganj P.S. Case No. 231 of 2020 instituted for the offence under Sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that while the minor sister of the informant was sleeping in her room, the petitioner came and established forcibly physical relationship with her and also threatened her.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this present case due to village politics. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44161 of 2022(4) dt.01-02-2023 2/2 petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.12.2020. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that there is serious and direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape with the victim. The prosecution witnesses who have been examined supported the prosecution case. From perusal of progress report in respect of trial sent by the concerned Court, trial may be concluded and likely to be disposed of within period of two months.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) amandeep/- U T