Allowed¶18

Md. Irshad @ Irsad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Mar 2024CR. MISC./17347/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; Patna High Court; CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17347 of 2024; Pupri P.S. Case No. 355 of 2020; Sitamarhi; POCSO Act Section 8/10; IPC Sections 341, 323, 376, 511, 34; rape of minor girl; co-accused Md. Intikhar; final form; Magistrate took cognizance differing with police report; Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act) Sitamarhi; Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey; decided 14-03-2024.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sitamarhi, in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 355 of 2020.

Md. Irshad @ Irsad Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17347 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2020 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Irshad @ Irsad S/o Md. Chhote @ Md. Chhote Babu R/o Vill - Bailhat (Maweshi Hospital Pupri Bazar), P.S. - Pupri, Dist. - Sitamarhi

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 14-03-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 355 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376, 511, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8/10 of the POCSO Act.

¶14

Allegedly, the informant’s minor daughter was taken away by this petitioner along with other accused persons and consequently co-accused is said to have committed rape upon her.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation of misbehaving with the daughter of the informant is against co-accused Md. Intikhar and not against the petitioner. He has submitted further that the investigating authority has submitted final form but differing with the police report, learned Magistrate, took

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17347 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2

¶17

cognizance.

¶18

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act) Sitamarhi in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 355 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶19

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶20

Nirmal/- U T

Md. Irshad @ Irsad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Irshad @ Irsad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aushif Mian @ Ashif Quraisi @ Md. Ashif Quraisi Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Rai @ Rahul Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Birbal Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Amarjit Singh @ Amarjeet Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Hasnain Qureshi @ Husain Qureshi Vs The State of Bihar

Chand Khan @ Md Chand Vs The State of Bihar