Bail application in a POCSO kidnapping and trafficking case; trial court report showed key witnesses already examined, so bail was refused with a direction to expedite trial.
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.4443 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2021 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Sonu Yadav @ Rambhu Yadav Son of Satya Narayan Yadav Resident of Bela Ward No.07, P.S.- Basmatiya, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun, Advocate Ms. Kanika, Advocate For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate Mr. Jawed, Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar Prasad, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8/17 of the POCSO Act.
According to prosecution case, the minor daughter of the informant has been kidnapped by the petitioner accused persons, in connivance with the prime accused Sonu Yadav and she was being trafficked to Nepal and in the meanwhile they were arrested by the Nepal Police.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4443 of 2022(6) dt.27-03-2023 2/2
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated.
Vide order dated 13.02.2023 a report was called with regard to the present stage of the trial. Report dated 16.02.2023 reveals that out of six charge sheet witnesses, three prosecution witnesses including the informant and victim have already been examined.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
In view of the report of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 25 of 2021 arising out of Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 107 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VI-cum Special Sessions Judge POCSO, Supaul.
Prayer is refused.
However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, accused under IPC and POCSO provisions in a child trafficking case, should be enlarged on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sonu Yadav @ Rambhu Yadav
The State of Bihar
Rajesh Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
