Patna High CourtCR. MISC./88865/2024bail rejected

Chunmun Kumar @ Chunchun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-17Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88865 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-530 Year-2024 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Chunmun Kumar @ Chunchun Kumar S/O Kapil Pandit @ Kapildev Pandit Resident Of Village - Anjani Math, P.S- Jehanabad (Sakariya), Dist.- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nityanand Neeraj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Jehanabad (Sikaria O.P.) P.S. Case No. 530 of 2024 dated 10.07.2024 (in POCSO Case No. 114/2024) registered for the offences punishable u/ss 137(2)/96 of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. And Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have kidnapped the informant's daughter on the pretext of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The occurrence took place on 06.07.2024 but the F.I.R. was lodged on 10.07.2024 and there is no explanation for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88865 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2025 2/2 this delay. It is further submitted that there is love affair between the victim and the petitioner and they solemnized marriage with their own consent at temple. The charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 17.08.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 of the B.N.S.S. has supported the prosecution case and also stated that the petitioner forcefully committed rape against her will.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail.

7. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T