Alok Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55661 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Alok Kumar Singh, Son of Jitendra Kumar Singh, Resident of VillageBelahi Nilkanth, Police Station- Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rana Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila (Sitamarhi) P.S Case No. 45 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354(D), 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66 (C) Immoral Traffic Act read with under Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he through mobile no. 9570220944 talked with the daughter of the informant in vulgar language and further caused threats and abused.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is in custody since 24.11.2016, no offence as alleged is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55661 of 2016 (2) dt.09-01-2017 2/2 made out, the informant is full sister of the wife of the petitioner and due to some misunderstanding she filed this case, the case has also been compromised and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the custody of the petitioner, now the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), Sitamarhi, in connection with Mahila (Sitamarhi) P.S. Case No. 45 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

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