Lalu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.91 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Lalu Kumar son of Govind Yadav, resident of village- Nawadah, P.S. Halsi, District- Lakhisarai.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Amrendra Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Appellant seeks bail in Lakhisarai (Mahila) P.S.Case No.17/18 / POCSO Case No.31 of 2018 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 376 (D), 448, 506 of the I.P.C., Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(i)(r),(i), (ii)(VA) of SC./S.T. Act.

Allegation against the appellant along with one coaccused is of committing rape upon the informant as well as threatening to kill her parents.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the age of the victim girl has been assessed by the doctor as 18-19 years old and hence, Section 6 of POCSO Act is not attracted in this case. He further submits that no sign of violence was found by the doctor and the occurrence took place in the house of the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.91 of 2019(6) dt.22-02-2019 2/2 victim girl and when mother and brother of victim saw them in compromising position accusation of rape has been made she has also admitted of earlier physical relation. The appellant has got no criminal antecedent.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.D.J.-1st -cum-Special Judge, Lakhisarai, in Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case No.17 of 2018 , POCSO Case No.31 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

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

(2) appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty 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) aks/- U