Rohit Kumar @ Botha Kumar @ Bodha Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55431 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2022 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada ====================================================== Rohit Kumar @ Botha Kumar @ Bodha Kumar Son Of Karu Manjhi R/O Santar, Mohalla- Asama, P.S.- Pakaribarawan, Distt.- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

According to prosecution case, on 13.12.2021 the informant and other family members had gone to attend ta marriage ceremony and his young child aged about 4 years was sleeping in the house. The neighbour of the informant namely Rohit Kumar @ Bodha Kumar came to his house and took his son to his house. It is further alleged that when the informant returned back from the marriage he did not notice his son in his house and started to search for him and found that his son was coming out from the house of Rohit Kumar @ Bodha Kumar and his pant was wet. The informant enquired from his son, who disclosed that Rohit @ Bodha had locked him in his room and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55431 of 2022(3) dt.28-02-2023 2/2 has indulged in unnatural sexual activities with him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the present F.I.R. instituted after twenty days of the date of occurrence and there is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence and only on the basis of suspicion the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim which was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed wrong with the victim. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Pakaribarawan P.S. Case No. 02 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Nawada.

Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T