This is an oral order allowing no further bail to Mahphuj Ansari in a rape and POCSO case. The High Court refused bail due to the gravity of allegations and the victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Prayer for bail is refused. Petitioner is denied 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.10261 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Banka
======================================================
Mahphuj Ansari Son Of Sarfuddin Ansari @ Khiro R/O Village- Baliyamahra, P.S. And District- Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Md. Nurul Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
4 26-09-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 493, 376, 323, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
According to prosecution case, she alleged that the petitioner lured her on the promise of marriage and forcibly, sexually, exploited her and committed rape upon her since last six-seven months.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10261 of 2022(4) dt.26-09-2022 2/2
implicated in the present case and the entire allegation against the petitioner is baseless, concocted and fabricated.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid record and submits that the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed sexual assault with the victim.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mahila (Banka) P.S. Case No. 11 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-Cum-Special Judge (POCSO) Banka. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
vanisha/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the present maintenance of custody pending trial.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahphuj Ansari
The State of Bihar
Rajesh Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
