Single judge rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a rape case, citing direct allegations against the accused and the gravity of the offence, despite arguments regarding false implication and FIR delay.
Anticipatory bail application rejected; petitioner is not granted anticipatory 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.6928 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria
======================================================
KAUSHAL KUMAR SINGH @ KAUSAL KUMAR S/o Ashok Singh R/o village- Nanhi Tola, Ward No. 16, Gram Panchayat Lalpur, P.S.- Chatapur, District- Supaul (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
| THE STATE OF BIHAR ==================== |
... ... Opposite Party/s ================================== |
|---|---|
| Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : |
Mr.N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anamul Haque |
| For the Opposite Party/s : For the Informant ==================== |
Mr.Rajendra Singh Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Adv. ================================== |
| CORAM: HONOURABL | E MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER |
3 12-10-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case no. 91 of 2021 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 365, 376, 354(A), 341, 342, 385, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has committed rape upon the informant. It is further alleged that when the informant’s parents approached the parents of the petitioner for marriage, they denied.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6928 of 2022(3) dt.12-10-2022 2/2
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. There is delay of about three months in lodging the FIR. This case has been filed in repercussion of earlier Complaint Case No. 818 of 2021 filed against the prosecution party by the petitioner’s father.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP appearing for the State have opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that statement of victim-informant was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. from which it is apparent that petitioner had taken away the informant forcefully and there is direct allegation of sexual exploitation against him.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there is direct allegation of committing rape against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
sushma/-
U
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a rape case.
Whether to reject the bail application despite the petitioner's claim of innocence and alleged false implication.
Whether to consider the delay in lodging the FIR and the sequence of complaints in deciding the bail application.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kaushal Kumar Singh @ Kausal
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
