Bablu Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2626 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2019 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar ====================================================== BABLU MANDAL SON OF PREM LAL MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHANDAN NAGAR, P.S.- BARARI (SEMAPUR), DISTRICTKATIHAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhola Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2021 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through video conferencing.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barari (Semapur) Police Station Case No. 252 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376/313/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioner, on the pretext of marriage, physically and sexually exploited the informant, due to which she became pregnant and subsequently the petitioner and other accused persons forced her for abortion. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2626 of 2021(4) dt.09-07-2021 2/3 petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case due to family dispute inasmuch as both the parties are agnates, which would be evident from Annexure-3, genealogical table. He further submits that there is inconsistency in the statement of the informant in the First Information Report and her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He next submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.07.2020 and there was degree of prohibition of marriage between the petitioner and the informant because they fell in the prohibit category under the Hindu Marriage Act.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the informant is minor, aged about 1617 years and she has supported the prosecution case in her statements, under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the allegation of pregnancy has been established during the medical examination of the informant. As such, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2626 of 2021(4) dt.09-07-2021 3/3 inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after one year from today, if the trial does not show any progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √