Nikku Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27156 of 2015 (3) dt.07-10-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27156 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2015 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== NIKKU KUMAR, S/O PREM SHANKAR BHAGAT, R/O VILLAGE - MADHUBAN BAZAR, P.S. MADHUBAN, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN AT PRESENT R/O VILLAGE - KHAN PIPRA, P.S. PHENHARA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN .... .... PETITIONER/S

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Krishna Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Pd.(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Tr. No.14 of 2015 arising out of Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 11 of 2015 registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 8, 12, 17 and 18 of the POCSO Act pending in the court of Spl. Judge, POCSO, Muzaffarpur.

The allegation of informant, Deepika Mahonto, is that she was coming from Ludhiyana and reached Muzaffarpur Railway Station. When Binod Kumar, friend of her brother-in-law, received her and went out side of Muzaffarpur Railway Station to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27156 of 2015 (3) dt.07-10-2015 take meal then some unknown persons came and one of them caught and detained Binod Kumar while others took her in a room near Pandey Dhaba, where five persons committed rape on her. At that time, miscreants were calling each other by name, Nikku (petitioner), Vikash and Gautam.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case mere on suspicion and he is in custody since 05.01.2015. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no ground to consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T