Allowed

Deepak Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC4 Dec 2017CR. MISC./51687/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An oral order granting anticipatory bail to a petitioner apprehending arrest under Sections 365 and 366(A) IPC for alleged kidnapping and sexual assault on a minor. The court released the petitioner on a bond with specific conditions regarding presence in court and cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount subject to conditions regarding local sureties, court appearance, and non-interference with evidence.

Deepak Kumar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.51687 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -41 Year- 2017 Thana -HATHAURI District- SAMASTIPUR

¶3

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

¶4

Deepak Kumar Rai, Son of Ratan Rai, Resident of Village- Dasaut, P.S.- Hathauri (Shivaji Nagar O.P.), District- Samastipur.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Khurshid Anwar

¶9

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 04-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶11

The petitioner apprehends arrest in Hathauri (Shivaji Nagar O.P.) P.S. Case No. 41 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections-365, 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

There is allegation in the written report that this petitioner along with two other persons were seen by the informant talking in front of his house at 10.00 P.M. in the night. The informant inquired from them, then they told that they had to talk with his daughter Ar ati. The daughter of the informant was sleeping at that time. In the morning the informant did not find his daughter. The informant has raised suspicion that this petitioner and other two persons who were talking in front of his house last night had kidnapped his daughter.

¶13

The case diary has been received.

¶14

The victim girl on recovery has given her statement u/S 164

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51687 of 2017 (3) dt.04-12-2017

¶16

2/3

¶17

Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that in the morning when she had gone for call of nature 2-3 boys pressed her mouth with Gamcha. She identified one of them as Deepak (petitioner). He gave her something to smell and thereafter, she got sense after 2-3 days. She did not find any of the boys at that time and she came back to her house.

¶18

Counsel for opposite party No. 2 has submitted that the victim has given statement u/S 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has taken name of the petitioner. The doctor has stated in medical report that there was sexual contact. The age of the victim was assessed by doctor as 16-17 years. He has also submitted that police in the supervision note has opined rape has been committed.

¶19

From perusal of the statement of victim girl u/S 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she has not levelled any allegation of specific overt act against this petitioner. She has only stated that she identified one of the accused out of three who gave something to smell and thereafter, she got sense after two-three days and on that date, she did not find any boy. She returned to her house.

¶20

In such circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner named above in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with in Hathauri (Shivaji Nagar O.P.) P.S. Case No. 41 of 2017 to the satisfaction of learned

¶21

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51687 of 2017 (3) dt.04-12-2017

¶22

3/3

¶23

Special Judge, POCSO Act, Samastipur subject to condition as laid down u/S 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason, will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioner and (3) if petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

¶24

(Sanjay Priya, J)

¶25

A.K.V./U T

Deepak Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar Rai 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

Abrar Ahmad Vs The State Of Bihar

Indrajeet Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Balwan Bhama Vs The State Of Bihar

Bipin Jha Vs The State Of Bihar