Santosh Rai @ Santosh Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58457 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur ====================================================== SANTOSH RAI @ SANTOSH RAY Son of Ashok Ray R/V- Madhopur Rani Tol, P.S- Muffasil, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arjun Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 02-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Samastipur Mahila P.S. Case No. 59 of 2019 instituted for the offence under Sections 376(A/B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/18 of the POCSO Act.

The prosecution story is short is that while the informant's daughter was sleeping at nigh in her house, the accused petitioner along with co-accused entered her house in drunkenness position and this petitioner committed rape with the victim, who is alleged minor, thereafter, they fled away. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this present case due to land dispute between

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58457 of 2022(2) dt.02-02-2023 2/2 the parties. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.6.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of commission of rape with the minor victim. The statement of victim recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. also supports the prosecution story and the victim also stated in her statement that the accused petitioner namely, Santosh Rai committed rape with her after pressing her mouth forcefully.

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.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) amandeep/- U T