Allowed

Jitendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Jun 2024CR. MISC./17416/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges of rape and culpable homicide. The court found merit in the petitioner's arguments regarding the implausibility of the prosecution's timeline and lack of DNA evidence while allowing cooperation in the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including appearance within six weeks and cooperation in investigation.

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17416 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2023 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria

¶3

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

¶4

Jitendra Kumar Son Of Late Kedar Yadav Resident Of Village -JHAKHRA Ward No. 8 P.S.- Alouli District- Khagaria

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

3 26-06-2024

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.D.Sanjay, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mohit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Lokesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vishal Kumar, Adv. Mrs. Sushmita Mishra, Adv. Mr. Sukesh Ranjan, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

Heard Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Senior counsel for

¶11

the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that petitioner and father of the informant are agnets and are having dispute relating to property. It is next submitted that informant alleges that fardbeyan of the informant was recorded at Sadar Hospital, Begusarai on 14.07.2023, wherein

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17416 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2024 2/5

¶15

she has alleged that about 8 months back, when she had gone to the field, when petitioner who in relation is her uncle committed rape but then she did not inform about the occurrence to her parents, thereafter, it is alleged that she was married to Nitish Kumar on 25.06.2023 and when she went to her matrimonial home she started feeling unwell and on examination by the doctor, it transpired that she was 8 months pregnant, thereafter, she was admitted in a hospital on 10.07.2023, when the doctor informed that the child died in the womb.

¶16

The learned Senior counsel submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if the informant was raped by the petitioner about 8 months back from the date when her fardbeyan was recorded, why she did not inform her parents. It is also submitted that if 8 months is reckoned from 14.07.2023, it would be November, 2022. It is further submitted that had the informant been raped on account of which she became pregnant then her menstruation cycle would have stopped but then from perusal of the allegation, it manifests that no such allegation is alleged. It is next submitted that thereafter the informant was married to Nitish on 25.06.2023 i.e. after nearly 7-8 months of the occurrence. It is further submitted that had the informant conceived on account of rape by the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17416 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2024 3/5

¶18

petitioner, as alleged, then by the time she was married to Nitish she would have been carrying pregnancy of nearly 8 months. It is also submitted that pregnancy cannot be concealed and it absolutely defies all logic, wisdom and reasonable human behaviour that the parents of the informant were not aware that the informant was carrying 8 months pregnancy at the time of marriage. It is submitted that by the very sight of a woman carrying pregnancy she gets noticed, as such, it does not appear probable that her husband at the time of marriage did not notice the pregnancy. It is further submitted that apart from what has been alleged by the informant in the F.I.R, no material has transpired during the course of investigation even remotely connecting the petitioner with the offence. It is submitted that the informant subsequently on 17.07.2023 died but then neither her blood sample, hair or the hair and blood sample of the child was preserved for carrying out D.N.A. test in order to establish the allegation.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17416 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2024 4/5

¶21

the petitioner and also his submission that sample of blood, hair etc were not preserved for carrying out D.N.A. test. The learned APP at this stage submits that in the event, if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may tamper with the evidence or abscond, on which, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will co-operate in the investigation.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Alouli P.S. Case No.348/2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to his notice that the petitioner despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17416 of 2024(3) dt.26-06-2024 5/5

¶25

liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording

¶26

reason.

¶27

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶28

amit/-

¶29

U T

Jitendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar 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

Chetnanand Vs The State of Bihar

Pinku Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar Ranjan Vs the State of Bihar

Harishankar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Amresh Kumar @ Amresh Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Binay Kumar Singh @ Binay Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Abhisehek Singh @ Golu @ Abhishek Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar