Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53325/2024rejected

Chhotu Singh @ Chhotan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-13Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53325 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA PS District- East Champaran ====================================================== Chhotu Singh @ Chhotan Singh Son of Subash Singh R/O- VillageChintamanpur Babu Tola, P.S.- Pipra, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

X Daughter of Rajeshar Sah R/s Ahwar Sheikh Turha Patti P.S.- Majhauliya, District- West Champaran Betiya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjit Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-09-2024 Heard Mr.Ranjit Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.03.2023 in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 12 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 13.03.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341,307,376D,34 and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 14.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.53667 of 2023. Thereafter, the petitioner has again renewed his prayer which was dismissed as withdrawn on 26.04.2024

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53325 of 2024(3) dt.13-09-2024 2/3 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29964 of 2024 with liberty to move a fresh application before the learned court below and thereafter he again filed the prsent bail petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and even the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner was involved in the present crime in question and he has committed rape upon the victim and apart from that, in paragraph-50 of the case diary, the victim has identified her articles which were recovered by the police from the place of occurrence and the medical report of the victim also suggests that the petitioner and other accused persons have committed rape upon her.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 12 of 2023 pending in the court of learned 7th

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53325 of 2024(3) dt.13-09-2024 3/3 Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, East Champaran at Motihari.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T