Pappu Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18048 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -69 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- MADHEPURA ======================================================
1. Pappu Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Yadav, S/o Sonelal Yadav, Resident of Village- Hathiondha, Ward No.11, P.S.- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Humayou Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-04-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Mahila Madhepura P.S. Case No. 69 of 2016, corresponding to POCSO Special Case No. 14 of 2016 registered for offences punishable under Section 376, 506, 504 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
Allegation against the petitioner is that he committed rape on the informant.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to village rivalry. Further a medical board was constituted, who assessed the age of the victim girl as more than 19 years and also no sign of rape was found on the informant and the statement of the girl was recorded after a period of one month. Petitioner has been in
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18048 of 2017 (2) dt.19-04-2017 2/2 judicial custody since 14.02.02017.
Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Having heard both sides, in view of the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of commission of rape on the informant, which has been substantiated by the prosecutrix herself in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T