Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted to the petitioner: enlargement on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, Sasaram (Rohtas), in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023, subject to the condition of physical presence before the learned Court below on each and every date (absence on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause liable to cancellation of the bail bond).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023 (offences under Sections 376, 379 and 120B IPC read with Section 61 of the IT Act), having regard to the facts, circumstances and his period of custody since 30.10.2023.

Court's answer

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, Sasaram (Rohtas), in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023.

Ratio / Principle

The bail grant carries a condition that the petitioner physically present himself before the learned Court below on each and every date; failure to do so on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause renders the petitioner's bail bond liable to cancellation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - Regular bail granted. Petitioner Ashok Kumar Yadav, booked in Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023 dated 17.03.2023 (Thana Mahila P.S., District Rohtas) for offences punishable under Sections 376, 379 and 120B of the IPC read with Section 61 of the IT Act - prosecution allegation of establishing physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage - enlarged on bail on a bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, Sasaram (Rohtas), considering the facts, circumstances and period of custody (custody since 30.10.2023 per impugned order dated 14.12.2023). Condition imposed: petitioner to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date; failure on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause renders the bail bond liable to cancellation. Petitioner's counsel submitted the victim is a major, the relationship was consensual, and the medical report shows no fresh sign of sexual assault, and relied on Mandar Deepak Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 442 of 2022), which distinguished a false promise of marriage knowingly made from a promise made in good faith but subsequently breached; the informant and APP opposed. Application stands allowed. (Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.275 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas

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

Ashok Kumar Yadav S/O Sudarshan Singh Yadav @ Sudarshan Yadav R/O VILL- RAMAWATPUR PO -JAIDPUR PS- BHAGWANPUR DISTKAIMUR BHABUA AT PRESENT R/O GANGA NAGAR RAJASTHAN

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Garg, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

ORAL ORDER

4 26-06-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the Informant as well as learned A.P.P for the State.

2 . The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023 dated 17.03.2023 registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 376, 379 and 120B of the IPC read with section 61 of the IT Act.

3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage.

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.275 of 2024(4) dt.26-06-2024 2/3

this case. The victim is a major girl who knows the consequence of the act of the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the victim girl and the petitioner chose to have physical relationship of their own will. As per medical report, there is no fresh sign of sexual assault. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Mandar Deepak Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 442 of 2022) in which “a distinction was made between a false promise to marriage which is given on understanding by the maker that it will be broken and a breach of promise which is made in good faith but subsequently not fulfilled”. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. As per impugned order dated 14.12.2023, the petitioner is in custody since 30.10.2023.

5 . Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.275 of 2024(4) dt.26-06-2024 3/3

concerned, Sasaram (Rohtas) in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2023, with a condition/s:-

( i ). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to cancelled.

7 . The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

guddukr/-

U T