Sugrib Ray @ Surya Rai @ Sugriv Ray @ Sarya Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73478 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Katihar ====================================================== Sugrib Ray @ Surya Rai @ Sugriv Ray @ Sarya Rai, Son of Janardhan Rai @ Jaladu Ray, Resident of Village- Haripur, P.S.- Barsoi, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umanath Mishra, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67(A) of the I.T. Act, 2000.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was on talking terms with the informant. On the date of occurrence the petitioner committed rape on the point of knife and it is further alleged that he recorded the video of the said act. When the informant started crying, she was threatened that if she will tell it to anybody, the video will be made viral. It is further alleged that after that the petitioner forced the informant to show her nude body on mobile.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during course of investigation the victim has given her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73478 of 2024(5) dt.20-02-2025 2/2 statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that the petitioner has taken her nude photograph and has threatened her. In the FIR it has been stated that the petitioner has committed rape but in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has taken a U-turn and has also stated that there is a land dispute between them. The petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 30.05.2024.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the above facts and circumstance of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned S.D.J.M., Katihar in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 17 of 2024.

7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T