Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57261/2024rejected

Niraj Das @ Niraj Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-25Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57261 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2024 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Niraj Das @ Niraj Kumar Das Son of Jogi Das @ Yogendra Das R/O Village - Chaturbhuj Piprahi, P.S.- Laukaha, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uday Prasad Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 03.06.2024, in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 116 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 01.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons kidnapped the daughter of the informant with bad intention.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57261 of 2024(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. In fact, the petitioner was in love with the victim girl and the allegation of kidnapping is false and fabricated and the petitioner has performed the marriage with the victim on 28.05.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner and other co-accused persons have committed rape upon her and apart from that the petitioner has kidnapped her and medical report of the victim suggests that the age of the victim is 16 to 18 years at the time of medical examination.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts that there is direct allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 116 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jhanjharpur, Madhubani.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T