Dismissed¶21

Rohan Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Jul 2024CR. MISC./30565/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.30565 of 2024, order dated 26-07-2024 by Justice Partha Sarthy: regular bail application rejected in Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case No. 92 of 2023 (IPC sections 376, 341, 323, 452, 354(b), 504, 506 and 34); chargesheet filed under the POCSO Act; subsequent marriage of the alleged victim and compromise petition (Annexure-2), conceded by informant's counsel, did not secure bail; petitioner in custody since 27.9.2023; State represented by APP Manoj Kumar.

What did the court decide?

Taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. together with the chargesheet submitted under the POCSO Act, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. ¶21

Rohan Kumar @ Rakesh 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.30565 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai

¶3

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

¶4

ROHAN KUMAR @ RAKESH KUMAR SON OF AIRUNI DAS @ ARUN DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PACHAM, P.S. - KIUL, DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶8

REKHA KUMARI DAUGHTER OF DHARMENDRA DAS @ SHYAM DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PACHAM, P.S. - KIUL, DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 26-07-2024

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this application for

¶15

grant of regular bail in connection with Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case no.92 of 2023 registered under sections 376, 341, 323, 452, 354(b), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the petitioner committed rape on her.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Though chargesheet has been submitted under POCSO Act besides other sections, it was a case of love affair between the parties and the relationship between them was consensual.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30565 of 2024(3) dt.26-07-2024 2/2

¶19

Subsequently, the alleged victim got married and the parties have entered into a compromise vide compromise petition brought on record as Annexure-2. The petitioner is in custody since 27.9.2023.

¶20

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. Learned counsel for the informant appears and submits that yes the parties have entered into a compromise.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. together with the chargesheet having been submitted under the POCSO Act, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

¶22

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶23

Bibhash/-

¶24

Rohan Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohan Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Shamshad Vs The State of Bihar

Pintu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ramawatar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sujay Singh @ Sujay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Awdhesh Kumar @ Awdhesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar