Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Singh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71353 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Buxar ====================================================== Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Singh Yadav S/o Late Dharmdev Singh R/o Village- Gowardhanpur, P.S.-Dhansoi, Distt- Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 07.10.2022 in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 79 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 03.10.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

According to prosecution case, this petitioner found the victim alone in the house committed rape upon her and threatened to kill her if she disclosed the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71353 of 2022(5) dt.11-07-2023 2/2 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the alleged occurrence has taken place on 07.09.2021 and the present F.I.R has been instituted on 13.10.2021 only to falsely implicate the petitioner in this case. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and the case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that statement of the victim is recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her and the medical report also suggest that something wrong has been happened with the victim.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 79 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-Vith-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Buxar.

Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T