Anticipatory bail in a POCSO and IPC Section 366(A) case arising from an alleged allurement and taking away of a 17-year-old girl. The court noted her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement that she voluntarily married the petitioner, granted pre-arrest bail with conditions including antecedent verification.
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.3087 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2021 Thana- BARBIGHA District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Sujeet Kumar, Son of Late Birendra Mistri, R/v- Hanuman Nagar, Barbigha, Ward No. - 18, P.S.- Barbhiga, Dist- Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER
2 15-05-2023
Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Fahimuddin, learned APP for the State.
The petitioner in the present case is seeking pre-arrest
bail in connection with Barbhiga P.S. Case No. 348 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (in short ‘POCSO’). The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
As per the prosecution story, the daughter of the informant aged about 17 years had gone to market for bringing vegetables but she did not return. The informant came to know that this petitioner with the help of his brother Sumit Kumar, mother and father had taken away the daughter of the informant by a motorcycle after alluring her. When he went to the house of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3087 of 2023(2) dt.15-05-2023 2/3
the father of this petitioner, the informant was abused, assaulted and threatened.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that no doubt the victim girl was a little short of 18 years. She was 17 years 3 months approximately on the date of alleged occurrence but she has attained majority and her statement has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has stated that she was in love with the petitioner and had solemnised marriage on her own. It is submitted that in nature of these cases, the provision of POCSO may not be attracted.
Learned APP for the State has though opposed the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner, this Court finds from the observations of the learned court below that the victim girl who was aged about 17 years 3 months and 16 days on the alleged date of occurrence, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that she had herself left her house and solemnised marriage with this petitioner, in the nature of the materials present on the record, this Court directs release of the petitioner above named in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today on bail in connection with Barbhiga P.S. Case No. 348 of 2021 (POCSO Case No. 53 of 2021) on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3087 of 2023(2) dt.15-05-2023 3/3
Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J.-VI, Sheikhpura, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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.
This application stands allowed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
SUSHMA2/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a 17-year-old victim's Section 164 statement that she voluntarily left home and married the petitioner justified pre-arrest bail despite POCSO and IPC 366(A) charges.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sujeet Kumar
The State of Bihar
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
