Jagdish Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67180 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2022 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== JAGDISH SAHNI Son of Thakur Sahni Resident of village - Balahi Tola, P.S.- Manjhagarh, District - Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 376(Ab) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of raping with the minor daughter of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that during investigation, there is a contradiction between the witnesses's statement, which was recorded by I.O. and the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 17.04.2022.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67180 of 2022(4) dt.20-07-2023 2/2

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and the informant, who is the mother of the victim specifically named the petitioner and narrated the whole story in her fardebayan. The Victim is a minor girl, who is aged about 4 years and her statement recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., in which she stated that the petitioner committed rape upon her, which corroborates the prosecution case. During investigation several witnesses as well as Medical report have also supported the prosecution case.

6. 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.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T