Ram Prasadi Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59485 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2023 Thana- ASARGANJ District- Munger ====================================================== Ram Prasadi Paswan S/O Late Yugal Paswan R/O Village- Lagma, P.SAsarganj, Distt.- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vivekanand Vivek For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 29-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has lured the informant's four year minor son on the pretext of providing chocolates and took him at a deserted place where he committed un-natural sex causing bleeding injury to him.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner is an old man of 75 years and priest in a local temple. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in judicial custody since 30.01.2023.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59485 of 2023(5) dt.29-01-2024 2/2

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that there is direct allegation of committing un-natural sex with the minor boy. Statement of victim boy and his mother were recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., wherein they made direct allegation against the petitioner for committing un-natural offence. Medical report is in consonance with the prosecution story and doctor found abrasion and swelling were found in anal region of the victim boy.

6. In compliance of order dated 6.12.2023, progress report dt. 11.12.2023 has been received which suggests that trial is likely to be concluded within 4-6 months.

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

8. The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within six months, failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U