Rambalak Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68582 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rambalak Mahto Son Of Ram Prakash Mahto Village-Sahiyar Bujurg, Chak That, P.S.-ROSERA, Dist.- Samastipur (BIHAR) ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhav Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 19-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Samastipur Mahila P.S. Case No. 52 of 2023 lodged under Sections 376, 420, 341, 504, 506, 363/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 17 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged against 2 named accused persons, one doctor of Sathi Health Care Hospital and Ashok Yadav. From the content of F.I.R., it transpires that the allegation has been made in two part. In one part, the specific allegation against accused Ashok Yadav and second part, the allegation against his doctor of the hospital, namely Sathi Health Care Hospital to kidnap and sale the child of the informant.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.. Plea has been taken by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68582 of 2023(2) dt.19-10-2023 2/2 counsel for the petitioner that the doctor of the hospital denied for operation and operating the informant due to which the informant has given birth to a male child. Counsel further submits that due to premature delivery of baby, the new born baby was admitted to child hospital and condition of child deteriorated and later on, the said child was died and it was handed over to the informant by the child hospital.

5. Counsel submits that petitioner is nowhere mentioned in the present bail petition that how the present petitioner, namely, Ram Balak Mahto is related with the said hospital.

6. It transpires to this Court that pleading of the petitioner is absolutely incomplete and no linkage between the present petitioner and his accusation which has been alleged in the present case.

7. As such, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail petition of the petitioner is hereby rejected, but in the interest of justice, liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may file a fresh bail application inserting detailed defence in his favour.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T