Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1047/2024bail rejected

Sanullah Ansari @ Sainullah v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-21Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1047 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2023 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Sanullah Ansari @ Sainullah Son of Late Sahdin Ansari Resident of VillageNilami Kotwa, P.S.- Kateya, Distt.- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, Advocate Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 21-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kateya P.S. Case no. 169 of 2023 registered under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the petitioner herein committed rape on his 9 year old daughter which was disclosed by the victim to him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is an unexplained delay of four days in lodging of the F.I.R. The medical report does not support the prosecution case in so far as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1047 of 2024(3) dt.21-03-2024 2/2 no spermatozoa was found. The petitioner is in custody since 24.8.2023, has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having committed rape on a 9 year old minor. The victim has supported the allegations both in her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C as also under section 164 Cr.P.C. Further in the medical report the age of the victim has been assessed to be between 14-15 years.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation of rape on the minor victim in the F.I.R against this petitioner which was 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. (Partha Sarthy, J) Harsh/- U T