Allowed¶16

Arju Kumar @ Arju Ram v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jan 2024CR. MISC./80162/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.80162 of 2023, decided 10-01-2024 by Prabhat Kumar Singh, J. Arju Kumar @ Arju Ram v. The State of Bihar. Anticipatory bail allowed in a case under Section 366A IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act arising from Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 1007 of 2022 (kidnapping of minor daughter of informant), because the victim's statement before the Police did not support the prosecution case; bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties within six weeks, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on bail upon arrest/surrender within six weeks on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC. ¶16

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80162 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1007 Year-2022 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

ARJU KUMAR @ ARJU RAM S/ VIKASH RAM @ BHUTI RAM R/OVILLAGE- GURWALIYA, DHOBI TOLA, P.S.- BETTIAH MUFFASIL, DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN

¶5

Versus

¶6

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 10-01-2024

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶11

Petitioner apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 366A of Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶12

It is alleged that this petitioner along with other F.I.R. named accused persons kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that victim in her statement, recorded before the Police has not supported the prosecution case and stated that she was talking with the petitioner since three years on mobile phone which was gifted to her by the petitioner. Victim was in courtship with the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80162 of 2023(2) dt.10-01-2024 2/2

¶15

petitioner and he called her to Bettiah to solemnize marriage due to which she fled away to Bettiah and he took her to his house, kept her there for three days and after that he took her to her Fua’s house. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

¶16

In view of the statement of the victim before the police, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District Judge- 6^th cum Special Judge POCSO at Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P. S. Case No. 1007 of 2022, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶18

Navya/-

¶19

U T

Arju Kumar @ Arju Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arju Kumar @ Arju Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Upendra Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Pravesh Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rekha Singh, Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Pandey @ Vijay Pandey @ Vijay Kumar Pandey @ Bhashkar @ Mama Vs the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home, Narcotic Drugs Control Bureau,New Delhi

Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Chandradeep Yadav @ Chandradeep Prasad Yadav @ Goitha Yadav @ Gaythi Yadav Vs the State of Bihar