Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81123 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2023 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Prasad Yadav Son of Shri Ramviriksh Prasad @ Rambriksh Yadav Resident of Village - Bishunpur, P.S. - Govindpur, District - Nawada, (Bihar) 805102 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Aaruni Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Binay Krishna, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Vatsal Verma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-09-2024 Heard Ms. Aaruni Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vatsal Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Mr. Binay Krishna, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 10.08.2023 in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 116 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 27.05.2023 for the offences punishable under Section 376of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 (i) (r) (s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner has sexually assaulted the minor daughter of the informant aged about 8 years and threatened her for dire consequences if she tells anyone about the said incident.

4. 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 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81123 of 2023(11) dt.21-09-2024 2/2 petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is not supported by the medical evidence.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed wrong with her. It has further come during investigation that the age of the victim was 8 years at the time of the alleged occurrence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, nature of allegation as well as the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 116 of 2023 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, (POCSO Act), Nawada.

7 . Prayer is refused.

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