Ravi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2491 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Ravi Kumar Son of Opendra Sah @ Upendra Sah Resident of village-Haripur, P.S.-Beldaur, District-khagaria, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kusuma Devi Wife of Mahavir Sah village- Taralahi, Ps- Bahadurpur, DistDarbhanga ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Seema Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 376, 509, 506, 354 C of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6 POCSO Act and under Section 67 of the I.T. Act.

3. The prosecution case, lodged by the mother of the victim girl that petitioner made objectionable video of her daughter aged about 16 years while she was taking bath and finding her daughter alone committed rape upon the informant's minor daughter and also made a video of the same and made it viral on the social media. The photographs and videos were made viral on facebook also. The Facebook Id. and mobile nos.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2491 of 2025(2) dt.13-02-2025 2/2 are mentioned in the F.I.R.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to village politics and in order to pressurize the petitioner to perform marriage with the victim girl. He further submits that there is a contradiction in the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 161 and 164. The doctor has assessed the age of the victim girl between 20 to 22 years.

6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation made in the First Information Report and the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 161 and 164 in which she has supported the allegation of rape and the fact that age of the victim as per the birth certificate is 17 years, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer of petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T