Vishpat Pujhar @ Brihspat Pujhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48571 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2017 Thana- CHANDAN District- Banka ====================================================== Vishpat Pujhar @ Brihspat Pujhar S/o Late Hajari Pujhar, R/o Vill.- Kumharadih, P.S.- Chandan, O.P.- Anandpur, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. None.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-08-2018 Heard Sri Ranjan Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared on behalf of the State. The sole petitioner, who is in custody since 24.03.2017 in Chandan ( Anandpur ) P.S. Case No.24 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the F.I.R. and submits that on perusal of the F.I.R. itself, it appears that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on an accusation, as if, the informant, while going through a mango orchard, the petitioner threw her and she fell down and received injury and, thereafter, she raised alarm. He submits that the villagers arrived there, however, the petitioner succeeded in fleeing away. The said occurrence had

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48571 of 2018(2) dt.20-08-2018 2/2 taken place on 22.03.2017 and it was alleged that the informant with other villagers visited the house of the petitioner , but he was found absent and on the next day, her husband and others went to the house of the petitioner and the petitioner was apprehended by them and , thereafter, he was produced before the police. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the accusation appears to be improbable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 24.03.2017, till date charge has not been framed.

In view of the facts disclosed in the F.I.R. as well as the fact that till date charge has not been framed, as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, namely, Vishpat Pujhar @ Brihspat Pujhar be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-( ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Banka in connection with Sessions Trial No.405 of 2017 , arising out of Chandan ( Anandpur )P.S. Case No.24 of 2017.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) nawalkrs/- U T