Vijay Shankar Singh @ Shankar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62422 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Vijay Shankar Singh @ Shankar Singh son of Keshav Singh, Resident of Village- Marichaon, P.S. -Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Kajal Kumari Daughter of Ramanand Gupta, R/o village- Ankori Melja, PSDurgawati, Dist- Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2024 Heard Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 12.07.2024, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 03 of 2024, FIR dated 18.01.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 34 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. 3.

According to the prosecution case, while the informant was returning to her house, in the meantime, a white coloured car, boarded by three persons including the petitioner,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62422 of 2024(3) dt.18-10-2024 2/3 stopped in front of her and co-accused person namely, Sonu Singh made her forcibly board the said car and thereafter, they misbehaved with her and also threatened her with dire consequences.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and the allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He lastly submits that from perusal of the FIR as well as other materials available on record it appears that specific allegation of misbehave is attributed against the co-accused persons namely, Sonu Singh and Bikki Singh.

5.

The learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that in the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., she has categorically stated that the petitioner and other co-accused persons have committed wrong with her and she has also categorically stated the name of the petitioner. Apart from that, the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62422 of 2024(3) dt.18-10-2024 3/3 I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 03 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Kaimur at Bhabua.

7.

Prayer is refused.

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