Allowed

Arjun Ram v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC21 Aug 2014CR. MISC./29959/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order granting bail to the petitioner in a rape case involving a minor victim. The court directed the petitioner to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Arjun Ram Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29959 of 2013

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -24 Year- 2013 Thana -TARAIYA District- SARAN ====================================================== Arjun Ram, S/O Sri Birendra Ram, Resident Of Village- Pachrawar, P.O. + P.S. Taraiya, District Saran. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar-1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 4 21-08-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

¶4

Informant, father of victim Sunita Kumari, aged about 15 years, happens to be a press reporter, had published a news on 05.05.2011 regarding commission of rape on a girl at Taraiya on the basis of a case registered at the Police Station which caused annoyance to the family members of aforesaid girl and on account thereof, it has been alleged that they have kidnapped Sunita Kumri while she was going to her school.

¶5

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that charge-sheet has been submitted but during course of investigation the so-called news item dated 05.05.2011 has not been placed or seized by the Investigating Officer. It has further been submitted

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29959 of 2013 (4) dt.21-08-2014

¶7

¶8

that from the conduct of prosecution, it is evident that they became hostile on account of love affair because of the fact that there happens to be inconsistency, improbability in the prosecution case after going through the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. According to statement of victim, she was taken away to Delhi and from there she was kicked out. While from para-23 of the case diary, it is apparent that petitioner was produced by the informant before the Investigating Officer on 27.02.2013 and had also disclosed that petitioner is confessing guilt as well as the victim has also been traced out.

¶9

It has further been submitted that on one pretext or the other production of victim was delayed and she was brought to Chapra by the informant and his wife where she was produced before the Investigating Officer and on that very day, her statement was recorded as is evident from para-53 of the case diary. The production of girl on 01.04.2013 while her whereabouts even in case of accepting the prosecution case came to the knowledge on 27.02.2013 and during intervening period, it is apparent that the victim was tutored and on account thereof, such kind of statement has been made. It has next been submitted that when the victim was taken away then there was no question of kicking her out from Delhi and that indicates that whole

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29959 of 2013 (4) dt.21-08-2014

¶11

¶12

prosecution case is nothing but a fabrication in the background of lover affair. Lastly, it has been submitted that petitioner happens to be under custody since 28.02.2013.

¶13

On the other hand, learned APP opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that be that as it may, the victim on the alleged date happens to be minor.

¶14

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, Arjun Ram is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 24/2013.

¶15

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)

¶16

perwez

¶17

U T

Arjun Ram v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Ram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Giri @ Dipak Giri @ Pawan Giri Vs The State Of Bihar

Dharamveer Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Jahangir @ Md. Jahangir @ Jahangeer Vs The State Of Bihar

Sateyndra Sao @ Kapuri Sao Vs The State Of Bihar

Kundan Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar

Manoj Jha @ Manoj Kr. Jha Vs The State Of Bihar