Allowed

Raushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Sept 2020CR. MISC./5326/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding offences under Sections 363, 366(A)/34, and 376 of the IPC involving a minor, the High Court of Patna directed the release of the accused on personal bond. The court considered the lengthy custody, pending trial, and pandemic restrictions, directing the submission of proper bail bonds with sureties upon restoration of normalcy.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on personal bond with a requirement to furnish Rs. 10,000 bond and two sureties upon restoration of normalcy.

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5326 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2018 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi

¶3

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

¶4

RAUSHAN KUMAR, aged about 24 years (Male), Son of Krishna Chandra Prasad, Resident of Village-Telhara Kalan, P.S.-Kundwa, District-East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Shakil Ahmad Khan, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 03-09-2020

¶11

Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of virtual Court proceeding.

¶12

The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence registered under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the I.P.C. Subsequently, Section 376 of the I.P.C. was also added.

¶15

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 07.09.2018, accused persons including the petitioner enticed away the minor daughter of the informant, namely, Neha Kumari, aged about 13 years, while she had got outside for tuition.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5326 of 2020(4) dt.03-09-2020 2/3

¶17

Earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 18485 of 2019 under order dated 11.07.2019, annexed as Annexure-1 to the present application, with an observation/direction to the learned court below to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months from the date of the said order. In light of the said observation/direction, the present bail application has been preferred.

¶18

A report was called for the learned court below regarding the present stage of the case. It has been reported that the cognizance has been taken and the case is pending for commitment.

¶19

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.09.2018. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The victim has been recovered. Her statement has been recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. The medical report of the victim is Annexure-3 to the present application. As per medical report, her age is assessed to be 18-19 years. There is no positive finding by the medical doctor in respect to the physical assault

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5326 of 2020(4) dt.03-09-2020 3/3

¶21

or sexual assault upon the victim.

¶22

On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

¶23

Considering the fact that the petitioner has already remained in custody for about two years and there is no chance of trial being concluded in near future and also the lockdown, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 218 of 2018.

¶24

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of four weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶25

U.K./- U T

¶26

(Sudhir Singh, J)

Raushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raushan 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

Vipul Kumar @ Vipul Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Rabindra Sharma @ Rabindra Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Keshav Singh @ Raju Singh @ Keshav Kumar @ Keshav Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Chunnu Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Shahid Alam @ Sahid Alam Vs The State of Bihar