Rajiv Ranjan @ Kaushal Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47612 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2024 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Rajiv Ranjan @ Kaushal Rai S/o Late Ram Sanehi Ray R/o vill - Sundarkhauli, P.S.- Aurai, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Dukhani Devi W/o Kailash Das R/o vill - Sundarkhauli, P.S. - Aurai, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan, A.P.P.
For O.P. No.2 :
Mr. Uday Prakash Shrarma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P., Mr. Sadanand Paswan and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354A, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014 as well as under Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 07.06.2024 at 08:00 p.m., the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47612 of 2025(4) dt.04-11-2025 2/3 intercepted his daughter and pulled her towards the field but she managed to escape and came back home and slept since she was alone in the house, further when informant and his wife came back home the next day, the victim disclosed about the occurrence, accordingly, informant went to the house of the petitioner to inquire where he was abused, assaulted and threatened by accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that no doubt the informant alleges that his daughter was pulled by the petitioner in a field but then she managed to escape. It is submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if occurrence of the nature, as alleged, took place then the victim could have informed her parents on mobile or could have informed the neighbours but then it is alleged that she came back home and slept. It is submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if such occurrence was committed by the petitioner then she despite being alone in the house chose not to inform her neighbour even but slept in the house all alone. It is also submitted that the FIR does not even remotely suggest that the occurrence was witnessed by any independent witness.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47612 of 2025(4) dt.04-11-2025 3/3
5. Learned APP and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the anticipatory bail application. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that he tried to contact the informant on several occasions but she chooses not to respond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Aurai P.S. Case No.106 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T