Patna High CourtCR. MISC./3168/2024dismissed

Vikash Patel @ Vikash Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2024-01-24Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3168 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2023 Thana- BRAHMPUR District- Buxar ====================================================== VIKASH PATEL @ VIKASH CHOUDHARY S/O BIRENDRA CHOUDHARY R/O VILLAGE- CHHOTKA VISHUPUR, P.S- NAINIJOR (BRAHMPUR), DISTT.- BUXAR.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shankar Pathak For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2023 in connection with Brahmpur P.S. Case No. 151 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363/366 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and two others are said to have forcibly taken away the victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is delay in lodging the F.I.R. It is also submitted that the victim was in love with the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3168 of 2024(2) dt.24-01-2024 2/2 behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. He further submits that the victim has supported the allegation and has also said that the petitioner had taken the victim to Surat and had established sexual relationship with her.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the victim girl was taken by the petitioner, I am not inclied to grant him bail.

7. Accordingly, this application for grant of bail is dismissed.

8. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

9. The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trail is delayed because of the prosecution. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T