Patna High CourtCR. MISC./86229/2019bail rejected

Md. Tausif @ Tausif @ Md. Tausif Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-19Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86229 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Purnia ====================================================== Md. Tausif @ Tausif @ Md. Tausif Alam, Son of Md. Safik @ Md. Safik Mirza Resident of Village- Milki, P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Kumar Anand- Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh- A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2020 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is in custody since 04.07.2019 and seeks bail in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No.37 of 2019 arising out of Mahila P. S. Case No.25 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

There is specific allegation against the petitioner that he committed rape of a minor girl.

However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that according to prosecution case itself, the present case was lodged after six months of the alleged occurrence and as a matter of fact, the petitioner has been roped in this case on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86229 of 2019(3) dt.19-03-2020 2/2 account of land dispute. The perusal of the record goes to show that the statement of victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded and in the said statement, she specifically stated that petitioner committed rape upon her.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to petitioner and accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) vikash U T