Runjay Kumar @ Ranjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49222 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2022 Thana- JAMHOR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== RUNJAY KUMAR @ RANJAY KUMAR SON OF KAMENDRA SINGH R/O VILLAGE- RAMPUR, P.S.- JAMHORE, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Chandra Bhaskar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Jamhore P.S. Case No.113 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326, 354(B), 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 08 of the POCSO Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons molested the informant. When the informant started shouting, one Pappur Kumar came to save her and after seeing him, the petitioner and other accused persons ran away from the spot.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49222 of 2022(3) dt.20-02-2023 2/3 has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner. He further submits that the occurrence took place on 08.05.2022 and the present case has been filed on 14.05.2022, i.e. after a delay of more than six days, without giving any credible explanation regarding the said delay, which creates a serious doubt over the prosecution story. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and there is ample evidence available against him in the case diary. He further submits that the victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded u/s 161 of Cr.PC. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today and seek

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49222 of 2022(3) dt.20-02-2023 3/3 for regular bail, the learned court below shall pass the order, preferably on the same day, in accordance with law. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T