Dismissed¶23

Md. Zafran v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Apr 2024CR. MISC./17613/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna HC Cr.MISC. 17613/2024, dt. 23-04-2024, Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya; Md. Zafran @ Mohammad Daud Alam v. State of Bihar; regular bail rejected; rape of minor victim; Mahila P.S. Case No. 57/2021 Madhepura; IPC 376(3), 323, 504, 506, 34; POCSO Act s.4; judicial custody since 11.07.2022; trial at argument stage, expected conclusion within two months; direction to trial court to conclude trial with petitioner's co-operation; no criminal antecedent pleaded by counsel.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail refused. Consequential direction only: trial court to conclude the trial as reported by it, with the petitioner's co-operation. ¶23

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17613 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Madhepura

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Zafran Son Of Md. Dawood @ Mohammad Daud Alam Resident Of Village- Jhitkiya, Ward No. 3, Ps- Shankarpur, Distt- Madhepura

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 23-04-2024

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶16

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Madhepura (Mahila) P.S Case No. 57 of 2021 from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum Spl. Judge, POCSO, Madhepura registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(3)/323/504/506/34 of the I.P.C and 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶17

As per prosecution case, it is alleged that petitioner committed the rape of the minor victim.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 11.07.2022

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17613 of 2024(3) dt.23-04-2024 2/2

¶20

and petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition.

¶21

However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶22

In view of the allegation, FIR, impugned order, and on perusal of the trial court report it appears that the trial is presently running at the stage of argument and likely to be disposed off within two months and also the allegation against the petitioner that he has established physical relation with the minor victim and considering the all aspects of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Hence, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial as reported by the trial court with the co-operation of the petitioner.

¶24

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶25

Mayank/-

¶26

U T

Md. Zafran v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Zafran 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

Mustak Mian Vs The State of Bihar

Roushan Kumar @ David Vs The State of Bihar

Lalu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Gorakh Rai @ Gorakh Ray @ Nirmal @ Nirmal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar