Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53814/2023rejected

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-11-06Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53814 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2021 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Manish Kumar Son Of Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Sah Resident Of Village Rajwahi Coloney Ward No. 3, Ps And Dist- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shiv Sager Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 06-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No.9 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the FIR, the petitioner along with other co-accused is alleged to have abducted the daughter of the informant with wrong intention.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. For the alleged occurrence of 7.12.2020, FIR was lodged in delay of one month on 8.1.2021. A statement has been made in para-3 of the petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53814 of 2023(4) dt.06-11-2023 2/2 Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 12.6.2023.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted the victim was recovered who corroborates the prosecution allegation in her statement recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she stated the petitioner abducted and forcibly established physical relation without her consent. The victim girl also stated her age about 17 years. It is further submitted that witnesses of this have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of the allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Amandeep/- U T