Dismissed¶8

Ramjee Ravidas v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC19 Nov 2024CR. MISC./33891/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Relief refused to accused (judicial custody) in Asthawan P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024, Nalanda — Section 376(AB) IPC and Sections 4 and 6 POCSO Act; reliance placed on victim's section 164 Cr.P.C. statement after FSL Patna's seven-month-delayed, indecipherable report; directions to Director, FSL Patna to submit proper/pending FSL reports; personal appearance dispensed with; sealed FSL report returned for conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Since the FSL Patna report was undecipherable even to its Director and the technical expert, the Court had no option but to rely on the nine-year-old victim's clear statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. implicating the petitioner; accordingly, no relief can be granted and the application stands rejected. ¶8

Ramjee Ravidas Vs the State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in judicial custody in connection with Asthawan P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024 (Section 376(AB) IPC; Sections 4 and 6 POCSO Act), is entitled to relief.

¶8

Court's answer

¶8

Ratio / Principle

Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna is directed to submit a proper report to the Trial Court so that the trial is conducted in the right manner, to look into all court cases in which requests have been made, and to immediately provide the reports, it having been found that despite orders of the High Court he never sends any report.

¶9

Key takeaways

The personal appearance of the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna is dispensed with.ratio¶10
The FSL report is returned the same day to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna after sealing it, so that a conclusion is recorded and sent to the Trial Court.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Rajiv Roy, J.; order dated 19-11-2024) rejected the application for relief by the accused in judicial custody in Asthawan P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024 (Section 376(AB) IPC; Sections 4 and 6 POCSO Act), where the nine-year-old victim's statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. clearly implicated him. Because the FSL Patna report arrived seven months late, was haphazard, and could not be deciphered even by its Director and the technical expert, the Court held it had no option but to rely on the 164 statement. Directions issued: the Director, FSL Patna shall submit a proper report to the Trial Court and immediately furnish reports in all court cases where requests have been made, it being noted that despite High Court orders such reports were never sent; the Director's personal appearance was dispensed with; and the sealed FSL report was returned the same day for recording of a conclusion and transmission to the Trial Court.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33891 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2024 Thana- ASHTHAWAN District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

RAMJEE RAVIDAS SON OF LATE LAKHAN RAVIDAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KONAND, P.S. - ASTHAWAN, DISTRICT - NALANDA

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶8

RUBI KHATOON WIFE OF MANNU ALAM VILLAGE- KONAND, P.S.ASTHAWAN, DISTT.- NALANDA

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Aman Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶11

8 19-11-2024 Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection

¶13

with Asthawan P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Section 376(AB) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act lodged on 14.03.2024 by the XX .

¶14

As per the prosecution story, the nine years old victim child’s mother has lodged FIR, alleging that her daughter returned home crying and upon query, she informed that this petitioner took her in a room and after offering a coin of Rs.10/-, sexually assaulted her. This led to the FIR.

¶15

In this case, case diary and the 164 Cr.P.C.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33891 of 2024(8) dt.19-11-2024 2/3

¶17

statement are available. As per the information, the Court had sought for FSL report on 01.04.2024 when the samples were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna.

¶18

Seven months later and after request/order/personal appearance, the report has come which the Court could not decipher. Upon query, Mr. Ajay Kumar, the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna also failed to inform what is the conclusion of the FSL report. The Technical expert, Mr. Neeraj Kumar has also submitted that another Technical expert is needed to decipher the conclusion.

¶19

This Court is afraid how the Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna is working. For seven months, they failed to provide the report and when the personal appearance is ordered, a haphazard report is submitted.

¶20

In that background, this Court has no option but to go by the statement made by the nine years old victim girl under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she has clearly stated that this petitioner took her in the room and after offering her Rs.10/and removing her pant as also his ‘lungi’, he sexually assaulted the girl.

¶21

In that background, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and the same stands rejected.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33891 of 2024(8) dt.19-11-2024 3/3

¶23

The Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna is directed to submit a proper report to the Trial Court so that the trial is conducted in a right manner. He is also directed to look into all the Court cases in which request has been made and to immediately provide the reports as cases after cases, it has been found that despite the order of the High Court, the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna never sends any report.

¶24

The personal appearance of the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna is dispensed with.

¶25

The FSL report is returned today itself to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna after sealing it so that a conclusion is recorded and sent to the Trial Court.

¶26

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶27

Ravi/-

¶28

U T

Ramjee Ravidas v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramjee Ravidas 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

Gaurab Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kishore Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu @ Rahul @ Rahul Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajendra kharwar Vs The State of Bihar

Md Imtiyaz Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Sahni Vs The State of Bihar