Nawal Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7056 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2020 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== NAWAL MAHTO SON OF LATE LOCHAN MAHTO @ RAM LOCHAN MAHTO RESIDENT OF VILL.- ANDHRA, WARD NO. 3, P.S.- ADAPUR, DIST.- EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-04-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Adapur P.S. Case No. 106 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of I.T. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the prosecution story, the daughter of the informant aged about 13 and half years came to the house of this petitioner then this petitioner and Lalu Yadav caught her and both of them

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7056 of 2021(2) dt.17-04-2021 2/2 committed rape upon her. It is further alleged that Lalu Yadav was recording the video of the alleged offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 13.04.2020. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the gravity of the offence alleged and the materials which are appearing from the records indicating, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on regular bail. The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.