Allowed

Munmun Upadhya @ Bishanath Upadhya v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC24 Sept 2013CR. MISC./23100/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing a charge of rape under Section 376 IPC, acknowledging provisional acceptance of the final form by the trial court despite delayed FIR lodging and lack of medical corroboration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/ and two sureties of the like amount.

Munmun Upadhya @ Bishanath Upadhya Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23100 of 2013 (3) dt.24-09-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.23100 of 2013

¶3

====================================================== Munmun Upadhya @ Bishanath Upadhya .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 24-09-2013 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, complainant and the State.

¶4

The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶5

The accusation against the petitioner is of establishing forceful physical relationship with the complainant on 8.10.2011.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that for the occurrence of 8.10.2011, FIR was lodged on 19.10.2011 when the final form was submitted which was accepted by the court but on protest cognizance has been taken. It is further submitted that the medical report dated 19.10.2011 also does not corroborate the accusation levelled in the FIR.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that the petitioner is the son of police officer, hence the I.O. misdirected the investigation and submitted the final form

¶8

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23100 of 2013 (3) dt.24-09-2013

¶9

when the independent witnesses have supported the accusation including the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement.

¶10

Considering the delayed lodging of the FIR after eleven days of the occurrence, the medical opinion did not corroborate the accusation and accusation was found false resulted in submission of final form which was accepted by the court, but cognizance has been taken on protest petition and the Statement has been made in paragraph 3 of the petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of twelve weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Kishanganj in connection with complaint case no. 923 C of 2012 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶11

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶12

Anil/-

Munmun Upadhya @ Bishanath Upadhya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munmun Upadhya @ Bishanath Upadhya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brij Nandan Soni Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Lakhindra Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Pintu Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar

Santosh Sah Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Nishant Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Sarfaraj Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar