Vishal Kumar @ Bittu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9088 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2020 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== VISHAL KUMAR @ BITTU KUMAR S/O Sri Basudeo Kewat @ Surendra Kewat, Resident of Mohalla - Pratapur, P.S. - Mehdiganj, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Mouar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-02-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 25 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 504, 307, 379, 509, 354 (B), 354 of the Indian Penal Code, sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act and section 3 (i) (r) (s) (w) of the SC/ST Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that other accused persons have been granted regular bail by the court below, but due to mistake it has been mentioned in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9088 of 2021(4) dt.18-02-2022 2/2 paragraph 15 of this bail petition that co-accused Rohan Kumar has been granted bail by this Court.

The informant is a minor girl of 14 years of the age. When she was going from her house, all the four FIR named accused persons misbehaved with her and badly assaulted her. She sustained injury. She was brought to the hospital in an injured condition by her brother.

The FIR itself shows that a minor girl of 14 years of the age was badly assaulted by four persons, including the petitioner and also they misbehaved with her. The injury report was called for, which shows that altogether five injuries have been found on the person of the injured victim. Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail and accordingly it is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U T