Md. Irshad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.65129 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2017 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Irshad Son of Md. Javed resident of Near Shahganj Chauraha, P.O. Mahendru, P.S. Sultanganj, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Praveen Kumar Agrawal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Anil Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 28-11-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in Special Case No. 112/2017, arising out of Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 361/2017, instituted for offences under Sections 376 and 377 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 4 and 8 of POCSO Act. It is alleged in the written report that on the date of occurrence at about 12 P.M. daughter of informant had gone to purchase Kurkure. After an hour, she came back weeping. On being asked by her mother, she told that on the pretext of giving Kurkure one person took her in house and beat her and opened her pant. Thereafter, the informant reached at that place. C.C.T.V. camera was installed in that house. After seeing the footage, all things became clear. Thereafter the informant took

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65129 of 2018(3) dt.28-11-2018 2/2 the footage in his mobile and showed the footage to the Mohalla people, who disclosed that the said person has been doing illegal act with minor girls for last three months.

Statement of victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is available in case diary, wherein she has levelled specific allegation against this petitioner.

Report from the court below regarding present stage has been received, wherein it is mentioned that charge has been framed in this case and one witness has already been examined. Further it is mentioned that trial is likely to be concluded within four months.

Considering the fact that there is specific allegation against this petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of petitioner is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and dispose off the same within six months from date of receipt of this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) rakhi/- U T