← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74119/2019dismissed

Chhotkan Rishideo v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-18Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74119 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2019 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== CHHOTKAN RISHIDEO Son of Mahendra Rishideo Resident of Village - Bhalwa, Ward No. 1, P.S.- Singheshwar, Distt - Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 25 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of POCSO Act.

As per FIR there is allegation against the petitioner that he attempted to commit rape upon six years old daughter of the informant.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no case is made out under Sections 376/511 IPC as victim has herself stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that nothing bad has been done with her and petitioner is in custody since 4.2.2019.

Heard learned APP, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that FIR as well as statement of the witnesses clearly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74119 of 2019(3) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 disclosed the allegation against the petitioner of attempting to commit rape upon six years old daughter of the informant and moreover as she is minor she supposed to know what is bad and what is wrong.

In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and if no such substantial progress is made in the trial within a period of nine months, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T