Narud Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51004 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2022 Thana- NAWADA MUFFASIL District- Nawada ====================================================== NARUD RAVIDAS Son of Baleshwar Ravidas R/V- Neya Bhimchak, P.SMuffassil, Dist- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Matloob Rab ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-12-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 123 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8, 12 of the POSCO Act.
As per prosecution case, it is alleged that the petitioner entered into the house of informant and tried to outrage the modesty of informant's daughter who is dumb. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 14.05.2022. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further submits that both
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51004 of 2022(2) dt.14-12-2022 2/2 parties are neighbour to each other and some dispute is pending between both sides and due to old enmity the informant lodged the present F.I.R. for making the pressure.
The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He has submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is of committing crime against the minor who is dumb. He also submits that so far as, the nature of allegation supported and corroborated by statement under Section 164 of the I.P.C. as mentioned in impugned order. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against the petitioner and material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the present petitioner stands rejected.
However, the petitioner may renew his prayer after six months from the date of receipt of this order if there is no substantial progress in trial within the stipulated period of time. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkr/- U T