Dhruv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63243 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2023 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN DistrictAurangabad ====================================================== Dhruv Kumar Son Of Sri Ajay Kumar Singh Resident Of Village - Mohar Karma, P.S. - Mali, District - Aurangabad (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Surendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 18-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 34 of the Indian Penal Code Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. It is a case of abduction and commission of rape by the petitioner with the informant's minor daughter.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this present case due to dirty village politics. It is further submitted that the medical report of the victim is not in consonance with the prosecution case. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63243 of 2023(4) dt.18-01-2024 2/2 judicial custody since 06.07.2023.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and there is specific allegation of abduction of minor daughter of the the informant against him. The victim has also supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C. She has stated about her age is 17 years. She has specifically stated that the petitioner enticed away her to Kolkata and kept her in a hotel for two days and forcibly established physical relation with her. During investigation, witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape with the victim, 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) lata/- U T