Allowed

Bhim Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Aug 2024CR. MISC./21615/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail in a POCSO case alleging sexual assault, claiming false implication due to delay in FIR and absence of medical evidence. Noting that charge had been framed and no evidence tampering was alleged, the High Court granted regular bail subject to conditions including monthly police attendance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two like sureties, subject to stated conditions.

Bhim Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21615 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2022 Thana- KHAIRA District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

Bhim Kumar son of Late Ashok Kumar Village- Madhopur Ps- Marhowrah Dist- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

¶7

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Thakur, Advocate ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶9

5 14-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶10

APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant.

¶11

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for

¶12

the offence punishable under Section 376 A, D/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

¶13

The petitioner is said to have committed sexual assault against the informant.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that there is delay of five days in lodging the F.I.R. without assigning any plausible and convincing reason for the said delay. It is further submitted that earlier to the case under hand

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21615 of 2024(5) dt.14-08-2024 2/3

¶16

an F.I.R. bearing Khaira P.S. Case No.412 of 2022 was lodged against the family members of the informant in which petitioner is an eye witness and only to put pressure upon the petitioner, this false and frivolous case has been lodged against him. In the medical examination of the informant, the doctor did not find any sign of recent sexual activity neither found any injury on the person of the informant and opined her age between 17 to 19 years. It is further submitted that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 01.08.2024 and there is no allegation of tampering with the evidence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 23.11.2023.

¶17

Learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposed the bail petition.

¶18

Considering the facts aforesaid as well as the fact that the charge has been framed and there is no allegation of tampering with the evidence, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No.415 of 2022, subject to the following

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21615 of 2024(5) dt.14-08-2024 3/3

¶20

conditions :

¶21

(i) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.

¶22

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge himself in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

¶23

(iii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.

¶24

(iv) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded and make himself available and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶25

(v) The petitioner will mark his attendance in the local police station in first week of every month till conclusion of trial, failing which the prosecution will be at liberty to move cancellation of his bail bond.

¶26

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶27

Trivedi/-

¶28

U T

Bhim Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhim 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

Bharti Sinha Vs The State of Bihar

Vibha Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Paras Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Mohit Kumar Sao @ Mohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar