Bail application for offences under Section 377 IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act. Court noted custody period and medical report showing no sign of recent sexual assault, and enlarged the petitioner on bail with conditions.
Bail granted on bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, subject to attendance condition
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54218 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2024 Thana- SHEOHAR District- Sheohar
======================================================
Sanuj Pandey Son of Virendra Pandey @ Virendra Kumar Pandey R/o village - Sugapipar, P.S.- Patahi, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rewti Raman, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Anant Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 19-08-2024
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 Sheohar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2024 dated 24.04.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 377 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4, 6, 12 of the POCSO Act.
3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have committed unnatural sex with the informant's minor son.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54218 of 2024(2) dt.19-08-2024 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. As per the medical report of the victim, there is no sign of recent sexual assault. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Navtej Singh Johar and Ors. V/s Union of India (Criminal No. 76 of 2016) in which unanimously held section 377 to be unconstitutional. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2024.
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 above-named, 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 concerned, Sheohar in connection with Sheohar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2024, with a condition/s:-
( i ). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54218 of 2024(2) dt.19-08-2024 3/3
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
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted regular bail in a case under Section 377 IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Navtej Singh Johar and Ors. V/s Union of IndiaRelied on
Criminal No. 76 of 2016
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sanuj Pandey
The State of Bihar
Pappurendra Pandey
Chandra Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
