← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./58619/2024dismissed

Upendra Lal Dev v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-28Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58619 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2024 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Upendra Lal Dev Son Of Late Jagdish Lal Dev Resident Of Village - Shivram, P.S. - Baheri, District - Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Jeeb Nath Lal Dev Son Of Ram Udgar Lal Dev R/V- Village- Shivram, P.S.- Baheri, Distt.- Darbhanga ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajiv Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-08-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 91 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner is alleged to have committed rape upon the victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim in her statement has said that the petitioner had tried to commit rape, and he had not committed rape upon her. He further submits that because of enmity, the petitioner has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58619 of 2024(2) dt.28-08-2024 2/2 made accused in this case and is in jail since 28.03.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. From the impugned order, it appears that in the statement, the victim girl has said that while committing rape, some photographs were also taken by her villager. The victim has been found aged below 16 years.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. This application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

8. The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the victim in the court below. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T