Allowed

Rajan Miyan @ Israfil @ Israfil Miya v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Jul 2022CR. MISC./8042/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition, the Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner accused of offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The court imposed conditions regarding court attendance, cooperation in trial, and no tampering with evidence or witnesses, requiring verification of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of court attendance, cooperation, and no tampering.

Rajan Miyan @ Israfil @ Israfil Miya Vs The… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8042 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2021 Thana- PURUSHOTTAMPUR District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

RAJAN MIYAN @ ISRAFIL @ ISRAFIL MIYA S/o Late Kariman Miya R/o Village- Laxmipur, P.S.- Purushottampur, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶9

3 14-07-2022

¶10

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.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶12

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 376,511,34,506 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 8 of POCSO Act and Section 67 IT Act.

¶13

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.10.2021, accused persons including the petitioner have tried to commit rape with the minor daughter (the victim) aged about 14 years.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8042 of 2022(3) dt.14-07-2022 2/3

¶16

implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the FIR that no case is made out against the petitioner under Section 376 IPC read with Section 511 of IPC. He further submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner as to what he actually acted with the victim. He further submits that it appears from the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that the petitioner only dragged the victim and no other specific allegation and the police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 23.10.2021.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Purushottampur P.S. Case No.79 of 2021, with the following conditions:-

¶19

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8042 of 2022(3) dt.14-07-2022 3/3

¶21

reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶22

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶23

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶24

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶25

Nitesh/-

¶26

U T

Rajan Miyan @ Israfil @ Israfil Miya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Miyan @ Israfil @ Israfil Miya 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

Amit Kumar @ Amit Rai @ Balram Vs the State of Bihar

Pintu Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Fakruddin Vs The State of Bihar

Makhan Sada Vs the State of Bihar

Govind Kumar Mahto @ Govid @ Kalua Vs the State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar @ Bamesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar