Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56245/2024rejected

Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-02Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56245 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-591 Year-2022 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar Son of Lalbabu Sah R/V- SIRSI, WARD NO. 4, P.S.- NANPUR, DISTT.- SITAMARHI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Gyatri Devi Daughter Of Late Ranjeet Mandal R/V- Village- Sirsi, Ward No. 4, P.S.-NANPUR, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-08-2024 Heard Mr. Sunil Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.04.2024, in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 591 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 14.12.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed rape upon the victim.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56245 of 2024(2) dt.02-08-2024 2/2 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner has committed rape upon the daughter of the informant and the medical report also suggests that the petitioner has committed rape upon the victim and apart from that statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her and the victim was minor at the time of occurrence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 591 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sitamarhi.

7. Prayer is refused.

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