Amit Pandit @ Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63894 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2022 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== AMIT PANDIT @ AMIT KUMAR S/o Rajeshvar Pandit @ Rajeshwar Pandit @ Rajesh Pandit R/v- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Ramgharwa, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 24-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case no. 38 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 448, 323, 324, 376, 511 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner is relative of the informant's neighbor, namely, Ramesh Pandit. Petitioner entered into the house of the informant and forcibly tired to commit rape with his daughter, aged 21 years. When she raised alarm, petitioner gave repeated knife blow to her which caused injury on her palm and neck.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63894 of 2022(4) dt.24-04-2023 2/2 that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this. Victim was treated at private hospital at Motihari but informant claimed that she was treated at Primary Health Center Chanpatia for which no medical report of government hospital is brought on record. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 6.6.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that statement of the victim girl was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has made direct allegation against the petitioner for attempting rape forcefully. During investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution story.

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 and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U