An oral order denying bail to a petitioner accused of sexual offences under the IPC and PCOCS for alleged abduction and rape. The court rejected the plea that the case involved elopement given conflicting victim statements and opposite reporting.
The prayer for bail is rejected. The petitioner is not granted the benefit of bail.
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.60313 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2019 Thana- AAJAM NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Sahmud @ Mukhiya Son of Md. Jakir R/O - Basagaon, P.S.- Azamnagar, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Amarendra Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER
3 18-12-2019
The petitioner seeks bail in Azamnagar PS Case No. 63 of 2019 registered under Sections 376, 366A/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of Pocso Act.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is actually a case of elopement. On the pressure of the family the victim has given statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which is at variance with her deposition recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. where she had stated about love affairs between the petitioner and herself.
Learned Counsel for the informant and the APP have opposed the prayer by submitting that in the statement under Section 164 the victim has supported the factum of abduction and forceable intercourse over a period of 25 days at Haryana.
Considering the rival submissions this Court for the present is not inclined to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner. The prayer is rejected.
SNkumar/- U T
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the benefit of bail can be granted in a case of sexual offences involving a minor child where the petitioner contends the case is an elopement.
Whether conflicting statements by the victim (Section 161 Cr.P.C. vs Section 164 Cr.P.C.) are sufficient to grant bail.
Whether the court is inclined to grant bail in the present circumstances.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sahmud @ Mukhiya Son of Md. Jakir
The State of Bihar
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
