Dismissed¶32

Gobind Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jan 2025CR. MISC./86393/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gobind Kumar second regular bail application dismissed; Kurtha P.S. Case No.303 of 2023, Thana KURTHA, District Jehanabad; IPC sections 342, 376, 363, 504, 506/34 and POCSO Act section 4; allegation of kidnapping and rape of minor victim; earlier bail rejection dated 04.04.2024 in Cr. Misc. No.22560 of 2024; Court declined to review earlier order citing rape allegation; direction to expedite trial; counsel submitted trial started with one witness examined; Patna High Court; Justice Sandeep Kumar; petitioner's advocate Shivendra Prasad; APP Anil Kumar for the State; opposite parties State of Bihar and Raja Ram Ram.

What did the court decide?

Considering the allegation of rape against the petitioner, the Court was not inclined to review its earlier order refusing bail; bail was accordingly refused again. ¶31

Gobind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86393 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2023 Thana- KURTHA District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Gobind Kumar S/O Butai Yadav R/O Village- Ahmadpur Harna Mathiya, P.SKurtha, Distt.- Arwal.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Raja Ram Ram S/O Munarik Ram R/O Village- Ahmadpur, Harna, P.SKurtha, Distt.- Arwal.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr.Anil Kumar, APP

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 08-01-2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

APP for the State.

¶16

This is the second attempt for bail of the petitioner

¶17

as earlier such prayer was rejected by order dated 04.04.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 22560 of 2024.

¶18

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kurtha P.S. Case No.303 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under sections 342 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶19

The following order was passed on 04.04.2024 in

¶20

Cr. Misc. No.22560 of 2024 which reads as under:

¶21

“ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶22

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Kurtha Manikpur P.S. Case No.303 of 2023 registered for the offence

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86393 of 2024(2) dt.08-01-2025 2/2

¶24

punishable under sections 342, 376,363, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4of the POCSO Act.

¶25

3. The petitioner and his family members are accused of kidnapping and committing rape upon the victim.

¶26

4. From reading of the F.I.R., it appears that the victim was kept in the house of the petitioner for the entire night and was raped by the petitioner and his family members.

¶27

5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and his entire family have falsely been implicated in this case because they have some previous dispute with the informant side.

¶28

6. In the opinion of this Court, this defence cannot be seen at this stage.

¶29

7. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible.”

¶30