In bail proceedings under sections 363, 354B, and 366 IPC and section 12 POCSO, the Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application, noting kidnapping and possession of the minor victim, and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Bail rejected; trial directed to be expedited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.35564 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2017 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka
======================================================
Mukesh Maraiya son of Mahadev Maraiya resident of village Sitaladagal, P.S. Bounsi, District Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nagendra Prasad ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 21-06-2018
Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.
The petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with Bounsi P.S.Case No. 297 of 2017 registered under Sections 363, 354B and 366 of the Indian penal Code and Section 12 of the POCSO Act.
Allegation in brief is that two minor daughters of the informant were going to another village then on the way petitioner and one another accused started outraging their modesty and kidnapped one daughter Asha Kumari and later on, police recovered the girl from the possession of the petitioner.
Submission is that no sexual exploitation was committed by the petitioner as she has stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Whereas learned counsel for the State submits that girls were minor and one of them was kidnapped by petitioner and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35564 of 2018(2) dt.21-06-2018 2/2
also recovered from his possession and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has supported the occurrence, as reflected from the impugned order.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected and the trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Arun Kumar, J)
sujit/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail prayer of the petitioner in custody should be allowed in a case involving kidnapping and minor sexual offences.
Whether the trial court should expedite the trial upon rejection of bail.
Whether the allegations of sexual exploitation and kidnapping are sufficient to reject bail.
Mukesh Maraiya
The State of Bihar
ARUN KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
