The High Court of Patna rejected the petitioner's bail application in a rape case involving Sections 341, 323, 354, 376, 504, and 506 IPC. Despite claims of false implication, the court found the prosecution evidence sufficient to deny bail.
Bail prayer refused. Petitioner to remain in custody.
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.3396 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2021 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
======================================================
Md. Wasim @ Wasim S/o Md. Isarafil R/o village- Patilwa, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
3 26-07-2022
Let the defects, as pointed out by the office,
be removed within four weeks of starting of Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 376, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation against the petitioner is that he committed rape to the victim girl.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3396 of 2022(3) dt.26-07-2022 2/3
that in fact nothing has committed by the petitioner and all the allegation against the petitioner is false and concocted. He further submits that in fact the father of the petitioner had filed a complain bearing Complaint Case No. 647 of 2021 against the family members of the informant and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case only that the father of the petitioner has filed a complain case against the family members of the informant. He further submits that the present case has been filed after a long delay of 14 days and there is no explanation of delay in the F.I.R. and the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2021.
Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim was recovered and her statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. was recorded in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her and the allegation in the F.I.R. also corroborated by the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3396 of 2022(3) dt.26-07-2022 3/3
In view of the aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sadar (Purnea) P.S. Case No. 198 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a case alleging rape and other offenses.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR justifies granting bail to the petitioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3396 of 2022(3) dt.26-07-2022Referred¶20
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Md. Wasim @ Wasim
The State of Bihar
Rajesh Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
