Ajay Gupta @ Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48383 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2022 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== AJAY GUPTA @ AJAY KUMAR Son of Late Rajendra Gupta @ Rajindra Gupta Resident of Village - Chanpatiya, Ward No.4, P.S.- Chanpatiya, Distt.- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Informant : Kumar Sameer, Advocate : Mr. Rishabh Mishra, Advocate : Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-11-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323,354B,504 of IPC and Sections 8,12 and 18 of POCSO Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he outraged the modesty of the victim girl with wrong intention.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48383 of 2022(2) dt.30-11-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the FIR that the date of occurrence as mentioned in the FIR is 10.05.2022 but the present FIR has been instituted on 08.06.2022 without giving any explanation of delay of 28 days. Further submits that it appears from the FIR that there is specific allegation of teasing against the petitioner but the present FIR has been instituted after 28 days which creates serious doubt against the prosecution case.

Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 257 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48383 of 2022(2) dt.30-11-2022 3/3

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

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