Patna High CourtCR. MISC./3706/2024rejected

Pankaj Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-21Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3706 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2023 Thana- BANMANKHI District- Purnia ====================================================== Pankaj Paswan S/o Sitaram Paswan Resident of Village - Ward no. 05 Banmankhi, PS - Banmankhi, District-Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Anita Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of abducting and committing rape upon the younger daughter of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that from the perusal of Medical Report of the victim, it appears that the victim is aged about 18 to 20 years and no sign of sexual assault was found at the time of examination. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.05.2023.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3706 of 2024(3) dt.21-03-2024 2/2

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and the statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she stated that this petitioner forcibly abducted and kept her in a place where he committed rape upon her several times, which corroborates the prosecution case. They further submitted that victim is a minor girl at the time of alleged occurrence. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T