In a criminal bail matter arising from an FIR involving sections 365, 376(a), 506/34 IPC and POCSO, the single judge rejected the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail despite arguments that he faced no direct rape allegation.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected.
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.86043 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2017 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
======================================================
Bittu Mian alias Iftekhar, aged about 27 years, Male, Son of Irsad Mian @ Irshad Ahmad, Resident of Village - Mahuawa Madarsa, P.S.- Nautan (Jagdishpur), District - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shiv Kumar Dwivedy For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1 ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER
2 18-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Nautan (Jagdishpur) P.S. Case No. 396 of 2017 registered for offences under sections 365, 376(a) 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
In the present case, as per allegation made in the F.I.R., the present petitioner along with Majid and Afroj have lifted the minor girl and stated putting pressure upon her for entering into the marriage with Majid Ansari to which she refused, whereafter, all the three persons committed rape upon her. On the pressure of the local politicians, the girl was brought
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86043 of 2019(2) dt.18-02-2020 2/2
and she was released.
The girl in the statement made under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that all the accused persons have taken her but, Majid Ansari was putting pressure to enter into the marriage but, when she refused for the same then Majid Ansari has committed rape upon her.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation of commission of rape against the present petitioner which gets support from the statement of the girl made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the police has also submitted the final form.
Looking to the fact that the present petitioner has participated in lifting the girl as also looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
rishi/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who participated in lifting the victim girl in a case involving rape and POCSO offences.
Bittu Mian alias Iftekhar
The State of Bihar
Shivaji Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
