High Court denied bail to petitioner accused of rape (IPC 366A/34) in connection with his minor daughter, citing direct allegations and victim deposition. Trial court to expedite proceedings.
Application for regular bail rejected.
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.2462 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-239 Year-2021 Thana- KASHICHAK District- Nawada
======================================================
RUPESH KUMAR Son of Dilip Singh R/v- Birnawan, P.S.- Kashichak, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arjun Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR
ORAL ORDER
3 08-05-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The instant application for regular bail has been filed by the petitioner in a case instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is a case of committing rape by the petitioner upon the minor daughter, aged about 16 years, of the informant when she was out of the house for natural call in connivance with six other named accused person.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. Informant and father of the petitioner are full
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2462 of 2023(3) dt.08-05-2023 2/2
brothers. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 11.11.2022.
Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that statement of the victim girl was got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she had stated that petitioner had committed rape upon her after tiding her hands, legs, eyes and mouth with her dupatta. During investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution case.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there is direct allegation of committing rape against the petitioner upon the minor daughter of the informant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.
The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude
the trial.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
sushma/-
U
Rupesh Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
