Ranjit Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22693 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -160 Year- 2015 Thana -MAHESI District- SAHARSA ====================================================== Ranjit Sah, Son of Ram Sogarath Sah, Resident of Village- Tariyama, P.S. Bakhatiyarpur, District Saharsa.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Rajesh Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with POCSO Case No. 03 of 2016 arising out of Mahishi P.S. Case No. 160 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act Allegedly, minor daughter of the informant became traceless and it reveals that she has been kidnapped by unknown miscreants. During investigation, the name of the petitioner and others transpired.

Submission is of false implication and that in this case co-accused Umesh Sah has faced the trial vide POCSO

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22693 of 2017 (3) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 Case No. 03 of 2016 and he has been acquitted in this case. The victim has not stated the name of the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the case has been compromised and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. seriously opposes the payer of pre-arrest bail by submitting that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that the petitioner committed rape with her and, as such, the petitioner is the main accused.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against him, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with POCSO Case No. 03 of 2016 arising out of Mahishi P.S. Case No. 160 of 2015, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st- cum- Special Judge, Saharsa.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T