Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65767/2022bail rejected

Dharamraj Raj Rai @ Dharam Raj Ra v. The State Of Bihar

2023-04-17Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65767 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2022 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai ====================================================== DHARAMRAJ RAJ RAI @ DHARAM RAJ RA Son of Ram Bilash Rai Resident of Village- Aalapur, P.O.- Dhankaul, P.S.- Teghara, DistrictBegusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashi Dhar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-04-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Teghra P.S. Case No. 156 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. As per allegation, on 05.06.2022 when the minor son of the informant namely Pankaj Kumar aged about 10 years went to the shop of the petitioner to purchase chocolate, he forcibly took away her son under his shop and committed sexual assault upon him and he also threatened him to kill if he discloses this fact to any body. Thereafter, the informant's son narrated the aforesaid fact to his mother and when she has complained it before the society, the petitioner abused her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65767 of 2022(3) dt.17-04-2023 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The FIR has been lodged after four days of the occurrence and during the course of investigation, no eye witnesses have come to support the prosecution case. The petitioner is a person of clean antecedent and he is under custody since 29.08.2022. On the other hand, the learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances including the nature of allegation, in my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges for bail, which is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/Kundan U T