The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing allegations under POCSO and IPC sections. They were released within six weeks by furnishing bonds and sureties, subject to statutory conditions.
Petitioners released on anticipatory bail upon surrender within six weeks by furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties of like amount.
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.3325 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Madhubani
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar For the informant : Mr. Gagandeo Yadav ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 08-02-2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 376, 313/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
The prosecution allegation, in short, is that the accused person established physical relation with the daughter of the informant on the assurance of the marriage and later denied.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3325 of 2020(3) dt.08-02-2021 2/3
petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner no. 1 is a lady. As per the allegation, the main allegation is against co-accused namely Varun Kumar who is said to have established physical relation with the victim on the pretext of marriage. As far as petitioners are concerned, there is no allegation of establishing such physical relation with the victim. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the relation between the victim and co-accused was consensual one. The petitioners have placed reliance of a case of the Hon’ble Supreme Court since reported in 2019 SCC Online SC-3100 (Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar versus The State of Maharastra & Ors).
On behalf of the State and the informant, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, POCSO, Madhubani in connection with Mahila Madhubani P.S. Case No. 65 of 2019, subject to the conditions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3325 of 2020(3) dt.08-02-2021 3/3
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
Pankaj/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in a POCSO and IPC case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar versus The State of Maharastra & Ors.Referred¶20
2019 SCC Online SC-3100 (Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar versus The State of Maharastra & Ors.) · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sajan Devi W/o Kari Ray @ Ramu Ray
Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar Ray
The State of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
