Dismissed

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC22 Dec 2016CR. MISC./54136/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In criminal miscellaneous proceedings, the High Court rejected the petitioner's application for regular bail in rape and POCSO offences due to grave allegations. The Court directed the Trial Court to commit the case to the Sessions Court and expedite the proceedings as the petitioner had been in custody for over five months.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; direction to commit case to Sessions Court for expedited trial.

Manish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.54136 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -69 Year- 2016 Thana -JALALGARH District- PURNIA

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Manish Kumar Son of Sadanand Vishwas Resident of Village - Pranpur, P.S. Jalalgarh, District - Purnea.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar.

¶8

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha

¶9

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 22-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶11

This is an application for grant of regular bail for offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶12

Allegation against the petitioner is that he committed rape on informant on assurance of marriage.

¶13

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the informant only to put pressure on the petitioner to marry her, has filed present frivolous case against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the allegation of committing rape on the informant is totally baseless, as they were to get married and established physical relationship with the

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54136 of 2016 (2) dt.22-12-2016

¶15

2/2

¶16

consent of each other. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 02.07.2016.

¶17

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

¶18

Having heard both sides and in view of the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape on the victim on the assurance of marriage, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner, hence the prayer of regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

¶19

However, since the petitioner has remained in custody for more than five months, learned Trial Court is directed to commit the case to the Court of sessions and expedite the matter as soon as possible.

¶20

With the observation as above, this application is, accordingly disposed of.

¶21

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

¶22

sunil/-

¶23

U T

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar 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

Lalan Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vivek Kumar @ Shani Srivastava @ Vivek Kumar Srivastav @ Shani Kumar Srivastava @ Vivek Shrivastava Vs The State Of Bihar

Munnu Sharma @ Monu Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar

Shankar Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Surendra Kumar Vidyarthi Vs The State Of Bihar

Ajay Raut @ Doctor Saheb Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.