IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION)

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7649 of 2020

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2019 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi

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

CHITRANJAN RAI @ CHITRA RANJAN KR. RAI S/o Mohan Rai R/o

village- Janipur, P.S.- Nanpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate

For the Informant

:

Mr. Sarbottam Kumar Sarkar, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rina Sinha, APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

15

05-07-2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to

remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four

weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

counsel for the informant and Ms. Reena Sinha, learned A.P.P.

for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in

connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 217 of 2019 registered

for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A) of the

Indian Penal Code. He is said to be in custody in connection

with this case since 24.08.2019.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

F.I.R. was lodged after three days despite the fact that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7649 of 2020(15) dt.05-07-2021

2/3

informant was aware of the alleged kidnapping of his daughter.

It is further submitted that on her recovery when she made her

statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C., she has categorically

stated that she had gone to the house of her bua and she had

gone on her own. Learned counsel submits that considering

these aspects of the matter and that the trial is not taking place

for the present, the petitioner deserves privilege of bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant

as well as learned A.P.P. for the State have opposed the prayer

for bail of the petitioner. It is submitted that the victim girl was

aged about 14 years at the time of occurrence of kidnapping and

she was kept for more than two months by this petitioner. After

her recovery on 23.08.2019, she had been medically examined

and was found carrying pregnancy of six weeks and six days.

Learned counsel submits that pregnancy of the victim girl shows

that the minor girl was subjected to sexual act and this being a

heinous kind of crime, the petitioner does not deserve privilege

of bail.

Having regards to the fact and circumstances of the

case and upon noticing the materials which have been placed

before the Court showing that the victim girl was aged about 14

years only and when recovered she was found carrying

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7649 of 2020(15) dt.05-07-2021

3/3

pregnancy of six weeks and six days, in the nature of the

allegations and the materials, this Court is not inclined to grant

privilege of bail to the petitioner.

This Court has been informed that the charge has been

already framed and the case is fixed for deposition of

prosecution witnesses. In the circumstances, this Court directs

the learned Additional District Judge-I-cum-Special Judge,

POCSO Act, Sitamarhi to expedite the trial of the case and

ensure early conclusion thereof after start of normal functioning

of the Court. No longer date shall be fixed in the matter. The

Public Prosecutor must cooperate in producing witnesses on the

date fixed in the matter.

This application stands disposed of accordingly.

Rishi/-

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

U

T

Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements,

during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court

website under the heading ‘Judicial Orders Passed