Patna High CourtCR. MISC./75936/2023bail rejected

Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-29Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75936 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2023 Thana- TELHARA District- Nalanda ====================================================== RANJAN KUMAR Son of Raja Ram Sao @ Raja Ram Prasad Resident of village - Telhara, Police Station - Telhara, District - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Dashrath Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 29-02-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with POCSO Case no.147 of 2023 (arising out of Telhara P.S. Case no.69 of 2023) registered under sections 363, 366A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his 13 year old minor daughter was kidnapped by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The daughter of the informant returned and her statement was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that she went on her own. She has not made any allegation of misbehaviour against

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75936 of 2023(3) dt.29-02-2024 2/2 this petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 13.7.2023 and has no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that the petitioner took her forcefully.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the contents of the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she states that the petitioner took her forcefully to some place, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after completing one year in custody or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T