Arjun Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9080 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -48 Year- 2015 Thana -RAJAPAKAR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Arjun Ray, S/o Devnandan Ray, Resident of Village and P.O. - Rajasan, P.S. - Bidupur, District - Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER -------------- 28-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No.48 of 2015 registered under Sections 366(A), 376 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code besides Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that it would appear from the complaint petition, which is the basis of the F.I.R., that the co-accused Munni Devi, the mother of the complainant/informant, in collusion with her paramours Kallu Ray, Bulu Ray and Niraj Sinha, performed the marriage of the complainant/informant with this petitioner. Thereafter, the co-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9080 of 2016 (2) dt.28-03-2016 2/2 accused, Niraj Sinha, Gulu Ray and this petitioner used to commit rape on her but she, anyhow, succeeded in fleeing away and reached the house of her father Amod Rai. In fact, the marriage of the petitioner was performed with the complainant/informant after negotiation with her mother Munni Devi but due to differences in between the complainant/informant and her mother Munni Devi, the present case has been lodged. Further submission is that the petitioner is in custody since June, 2015.

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-I, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No.48 of 2015. Out of the two sureties, one must be close relative of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he/she is related with the petitioner. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioner.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T