Ranjan Kumar Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22635 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2020 Thana- MAHILA District- Munger ====================================================== RANJAN KUMAR RANJAN Son of Anirudh Pandit Resident of village - Kathdanad, P.S. - Phulli Dumar, District - Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Manoj Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-02-2022 Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding. The matter has been listed under the heading 'For Orders' under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the Office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 376 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution allegation, in short, is that the petitioner established physical relation with the victim on the pretext of marriage.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22635 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2022 2/3 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been made accused due to mistake of fact. As per the F.I.R., physical relationship is said to have been established between the parties on the pretext of marriage. The said relationship was consented relationship. Subsequently, due to one reason or the other, the marriage could not be performed. Hence, the present prosecution has been brought upon. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance of cases of the Hon'ble Supreme Court since reported in 2019 SCC Online SC-3100 (Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar versus The State of Maharastra & Ors) and (2019) 9 SCC 608 (Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.). There is no medical evidence available on record in support of offence under Section 313 of I.P.C.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22635 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2022 3/3 that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in covid cases.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bonds to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger in connection with Munger Mahila P.S. Case No. 21/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.
(Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T