Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5357 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas ====================================================== SONU KUMAR @ SONU KUMAR YADAV Son of Dhanjee Yadav @ Dhanjee Singh Resident of Village- Sikariyan, P.S.- Karakat, District- Rohtas. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar Mishra, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mrs.Usha Kumari 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 03.10.2019 in Registration No.128 of 2019 arising out of Mahila P.S.Case No.38 of 2019 passed by the learned A.D.J.-1st, Rohtas, Sasaram, registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(w) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The FIR would reveal that informant is already a married girl with Sanjay Ram. Allegation is that the appellant induced her that the appellant would marry with the informant. Thereafter, both were in physical relation and later on appellant refused to marry. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5357 of 2019(3) dt.04-02-2020 2/2 victim is specific that the appellant has done nothing with her. Considering the statement of the victim girl, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellant shall fully cooperate with the trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellant.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- U T