Subodh Paswan @ Subodh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.595 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-683 Year-2018 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SUBODH PASWAN @ SUBODH Son of LATE MAHENDRA PASWAN Resident of Village - Basatpur, P.S. - Runnisaidpur, District - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 25-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks of normal functioning of the court proceeding. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 312, 366A, 370, 372, 373, 376, 120B, 317, 350, 503 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 75, 81, 87 of the J.J. Act, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, Section 5 of Immoral Traffic Act, Section 9, 11 P.C.M. Act and Section 6 of the Pre Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act. In the written report, it is alleged that victim girl Kanchan Devi was residing with her neighbor, namely, Milia Devi, who called her as Mausi. It is alleged that Milia Devi got her married with the petitioner and thereafter she started living

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.595 of 2021(2) dt.25-02-2021 2/2 with him. It is further alleged that thereafter, she became pregnant from the said wedlock, but she was aborted by her inlaws. Lastly, second time, she also became pregnant, but during last stage of her pregnancy she was ousted from her sasural. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that during course of investigation, the several witnesses have disclosed that after marriage, the victim girl fled away as such petitioner has not involved in alleged occurrence. He submits that during the trial victim made statement before the court below that she herself gone to Delhi for work and further states that she reside in the house of the petitioner as a wife. He further submits that petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 28.12.2018.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.- VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act) Sitamarhi in connection with Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No. 683 of 2018. devendra/- (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) U T