Bhupendra Kala @ Kala @ Bhupendra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15193 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2010 Thana- PATORI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bhupendra Kala @ Kala @ Bhupendra S/o Rati Ram, R/o Mohalla Nazavgarh Ishapur, P.S.- Zafarpur, District- New Delhi- 73. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with Patori PS Case No.83 of 2010, giving rise to Sessions Trial No.598 of 2016, registered under Sections 365, 366(A) and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation in brief is that two minor daughters of the informant were kidnapped and in captivity rape was committed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case was instituted after five days and the petitioner is not named in the FIR, however, subsequently he was made accused after statement of the victim girls recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in fact it was a case of elopement with other coaccused; whereas learned counsel for the State submits that two

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15193 of 2018(4) dt.10-05-2018 2/2 minor daughters of the informant were kidnapped and they were recovered and made statement in the court with specific allegation against the petitioner that in captivity, he repeatedly committed rape.

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances as also the specific allegation of committing rape, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Patori PS Case No.83 of 2010, giving rise to Sessions Trial No.598 of 2016, pending in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Samastipur.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner, who is in custody and as submitted charge has been framed, so conclude the trial preferably within a year. (Arun Kumar, J) S.KUMAR/- U T