Rameshwar Sada v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.74735 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- Supaul ====================================================== Rameshwar Sada, age about 60 years Son of Birbal Sada Resident of VillageBarmotra, P.S. Baluabazar, District- Supaul ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Amar Nath Yadav, Adv.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh -5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 10-01-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 07.03.2018 in connection with Supaul Mahila P.S. Case No. 30 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Sections 376D, 341 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, who is father of the victim, is that his younger daughter, Mariyam Khatoon, came home and informed that his 15 years old daughter, Subeda Khatoon, has been taken in the maize field by the petitioner and other co-accused, Dev Chandra Sada, and when he came to the place of occurrence found the victim in an unconscious condition and the petitioner and other accused ran away from the place of occurrence. The daughter of the informant informed that both, the petitioner and the co-accused, had committed rape on her.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.74735 of 2018(4) dt.10-01-2019 2/2 petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the medical examination report found no spermatozoa, live or dead.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the date of occurrence is 04.03.2018 and vaginal swab for pathological examination was done on 06.03.2018. He submits that the victim-girl is minor, as assessed by the medical board and that the victim-girl in her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code has stated that both, the petitioner and the co-accused, committed rape on her.

From the perusal of the case diary, it appears that her statement was recorded by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, V, Supaul, on 21.03.2018, who has also found that the victim was not physically in a position to give statement, but, her statement has been accepted.

Considering the allegation, made against the petitioner, the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Shamshad/- U