Ramchandra Ram @ Ram Chandra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52260 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2024 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ramchandra Ram @ Ram Chandra Kumar Son of Wari Ram VILLAGEDOIYA, P.S.- CHANARI, DISTT.- ROHTAS ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar BIHAR 2.
X D/O- DUKHANTI RAM R/V- DOIYA, P.S.- CHENARI, DISTT.- ROHTAS ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-08-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner for the offences alleged under Sections 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of the POCSO Act, registered in connection with Chenari P.S.Case No. 26 of 2024
3. As per allegation, Six named accused persons kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, the victim and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52260 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 2/2 petitioner were in love and affection and the victim went with the petitioner as per her own sweet will.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the victim is a minor girl, and in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC she has fully corroborated the allegation, to which the learned counsel for the petitioner replied that in the medical examination the age of the victim was found as 18 years.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. It is accordingly rejected.
7. The petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charges.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T