Patna High CourtCR. MISC./83377/2023bail rejected

Naresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-09Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83377 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDRADIP District- Jamui ====================================================== NARESH YADAV Son of Foudari Yadav R/o vill - Amba, P.S - Chandradeep, Distt. - Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 09-04-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chandradeep P.S. Case no.180 of 2023 registered under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have committed rape on the daughter of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. While the occurrence is said to have taken place on 21.9.2023, information was given to the police 5 days later on 26.9.023 without any explanation for the same. The medical report does not support the prosecution case. The petitioner is in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83377 of 2023(3) dt.09-04-2024 2/2 custody since 27.9.2023 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that not only there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having committed rape on the daughter of the informant, the same is supported in the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the direct allegations against the petitioner of having committed rape on the daughter of the informant and the same having been supported in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T