Subhash Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40322 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2018 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Subhash Ram Son of Shankar Ram Resident of Village - Rampur Milki, P.S. Ara (M), District - Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sir Pawan Kumar Chaurasiya ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for State as well as learned counsel for the Informant. Petitioner seeks bail in Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 72 of 2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 511, 354B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 67(A) of the I.T. Act and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

Informant who herself is the victim has alleged in her written complaint that while she had gone to attend the call of nature petitioner and Riyaz Ansari caught hold of her. Allegation against the petitioner is of only preparing video of the Informant on his Mobile and thereafter they fled away. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 10.03.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40322 of 2018(3) dt.20-09-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the Informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ADJ-I, Bhojpur at Ara, in POCSO Case No. 17 of 2018 arising out of Ara (M) P.S. Case No. 72 of 2018, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U