Single judge dismissed bail application of petitioner accused in abduction and marriage case under IPC and POCSO Act, refusing bail given nature of accusation and age gap.
Prayer for bail was rejected. Learned trial court directed to expedite the trial.
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.18532 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2014 Thana- AANDAR District- Siwan
======================================================
Arjun Singh Son of Late Mahanth Singh Resident of Village - Gopi Patiawn, P.S.- M.H. Nagar, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajiv Nayan (App
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
4 06-08-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Section 365, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in which, later on, Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and 6 of the POCSO Act was also added.
Prosecution case in short is that the accused persons conspired to each other and disappeared the minor daughter of the informant with criminal intent.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 21-01-2019. Charge sheet has already been submitted. The petitioner has been falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18532 of 2019(4) dt.06-08-2019 2/2
implicated in the present case. There is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R. The victim girl has been examined under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. She has stated that the petitioner forcibly solemnized married with her. The victim is aged about 13-15 years whereas the petitioner is aged about 46 years.
Considering the nature of accusation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Aandar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2018 is rejected.
Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner charged under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Arjun Singh
The State of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
