Allowed

Mantu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 May 2022CR. MISC./58015/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail in a POCSO case alleging he locked and committed an immoral act with an 11-year-old. During trial, no prosecution witness supported the case. The High Court granted bail subject to bonds and conditions, relieving the petitioner from custody.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties and complying with specific conditions.

Mantu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58015 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2021 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas

¶3

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

¶4

Mantu Kumar Son of Late Lal Muni Paswan @ Lal Muni Ram Residento of Villege - Motha, P.s.- Karakat, Distt.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 18-05-2022

¶12

Let the defects, if any, be removed within four weeks from today.

¶13

Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Mr. Sumiran Roy, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner which has been kept on record.

¶15

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered in connection with POCSO Case No. 27 of 2021 corresponding to Dinara P.S.Case No. 15 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 377 of the Indian Penal Code section 8,12 of the POCSO Act.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 17.01.2021 at about 10 am while the son of the informant aged

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58015 of 2021(3) dt.18-05-2022 2/3

¶18

about 11 years had gone to herding and returned at 1 pm. He told to the informant that this petitioner had locked in a room and thereafter committed immoral act.

¶19

It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that during pendency of this application the trial of this petitioner has proceeded and altogether five prosecution witnesses have been examined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Exclusive Special Court, Rohtas at Sasaram on 10.02.2022 to 28.02.2022 and 09.03.2022 to 23.03.2022 respectively but non of the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution case and as such nothing remained in the present case.

¶20

On the other hand, learned Additional Public prosecution for the State opposed the bail application of the petitioner but fairly submits that though during the course of investigation, the witnesses had supported the prosecution case but as they have not supported the prosecution case in the trial nothing remained in this case.

¶21

Having considered the contentions of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that during the course of trial non of the prosecution witnesses had supported the prosecution case, let the petitioner, above named, who is in custody since

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58015 of 2021(3) dt.18-05-2022 3/3

¶23

19.01.202 be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge -VII cum Exclusive Special Court (POCSO), rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Dinara P.S.Case No. 15 of 2021 subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as

¶24

follows:-

¶25

(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the

¶26

trial.

¶27

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

¶28

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.

¶29

(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

¶30

(Harish Kumar, J.)

¶31

N.K/-

¶32

U T

Mantu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantu Kumar 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

Rabish Kumar @ Bisiya Vs the State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Kamat @ Nitish Kumar @ Nitish Kamat Vs the State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Sharwan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Kunal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar