Allowed

Sandeep Ram v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Jan 2022CR. MISC./29692/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court, noting the COVID-19 pandemic and jail overcrowding, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner after he filed a supplementary affidavit containing the victim's statement. The petitioner must surrender within 12 weeks and clear procedural defects within 4 weeks of normalcy.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail on personal bonds, subject to surrender within 12 weeks and furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Sandeep Ram Vs the State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29692 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2020 Thana- MAINATAND District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Sandeep Ram S/O Late Triveni Ram Resident Of Village Sinhpur, P.S.MAINATAND, District-West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nazir Ansari, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 27-01-2022

¶14

Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the

¶15

matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding.

¶16

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

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

¶18

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner enclosing the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C.. The same be kept on record.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the Office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.

¶20

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29692 of 2021(2) dt.27-01-2022 2/3

¶22

Code and 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶23

The prosecution allegation, in short, is that the daughter of the informant was missing and informant on inquiry suspects that she has been kidnapped by the accused person for the purpose of marriage.

¶24

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The alleged occurrence is said to have taken place on 26.08.2020 for which case was instituted on 02.09.2020. The delay has not been explained by the prosecution. On recovery, the statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has stated that she had left the house out of her own will and has already got married with this petitioner.

¶25

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

¶26

It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29692 of 2021(2) dt.27-01-2022 3/3

¶28

that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in covid cases.

¶29

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bonds to the satisfaction of learned 7^th Additional Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, POCSO Act, West Champaran at Bettiah in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 129 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶30

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 eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶31

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶32

Pankaj/-

Sandeep Ram v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Ram 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajdeo Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Sharwan @ Sharwan Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Jayram Singh @ Jairam Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Kunal Singh @ Kunal Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Urmila Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar