Patna High CourtCR. MISC./63384/2024bail granted

Faiyaz Ansari @ Chotka v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-30Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63384 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Faiyaz Ansari @ Chotka Son of Nanhku Ansari @ Reyaz Ansari @ Nanhu Ansari R/O Danu Bigha, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Dist.- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Reena Devi Wife of Upendra Paswan Resident of- Danu Bigha, P.S. - Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in POCSO Case No. 46 of 2024 arising out of Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024 dated 27.01.2024 registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 363, 366A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act and sections 3(2)(V)(a) of the Scheduled Case and Scheduled Tribe Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the coaccused persons are alleged to have kidnapped the informant's daughter on the pretext of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63384 of 2024(2) dt.30-09-2024 2/2 the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. As per supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, the victim in her examination-in-chief has stated that the petitioner did not commit any wrong with her. The victim was not forced or seduced to have illicit intercourse with another person. There is no allegation of sexual assault against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 30.01.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Jehanabad in connection with POCSO Case No. 46 of 2024 arising out of Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T