Prince Kumar @ Prakash Kumar @ Prince Prakash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65924 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-239 Year-2024 Thana- TRIVENIGANJ District- Supaul ====================================================== Prince Kumar @ Prakash Kumar @ Prince Prakash Kumar S/o Jagdish Prasad Yadav Resident of Daarkha, Triveniganj Nagar Parshad ward no 21, PSTriveniganj, Distt. - Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sumit Kumar, AdV For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 239 of 2024 dated 18.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 342, 370, 370A, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 18.06.2024 the informant received information that in the premises of Prince Kumar @ Prakash Kumar (petitioner), a racket of prostitution was going on. The informant reached the place of occurrence for verification of the said information. On being searched the said
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65924 of 2024(3) dt.26-10-2024 2/3 premises, three male and three female persons were found in separate room and on interrogation Prince Kumar (petitioner) disclosed that he is running a brothel house in his premises and the co-accused Anuplal Sardar, Birbal Kumar Sinha and Md. Nasim were regularly visiting here. It is further alleged that the co-accused Shanti Devi has brought girls and handed over to Prince Kumar (petitioner) and they forced them for prostitution. Further a search was conducted, Rs. 11,460/- and one mobile phone were recovered from the conscious possession of Prince Kumar (petitioner) and from the conscious possession of the coaccused Anuplal Sardar, Birbal Kumar Sinha and Md. Nasim one mobile phone from each of them was recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has three antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 19.06.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the allegation of running brothel house is against the petitioner. The petitioner is the owner of the said premises. As per the statement
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65924 of 2024(3) dt.26-10-2024 3/3 of the victim girls, the co-accused Shanti Devi has brought the victim girls and handed over to the petitioner and he forced them for prostitution.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the serious and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 239 of 2024 pending in the court of learned C.J.M, Supaul.
7. The application stands rejected.
8. The learned trial court is further directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T