SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
AFTAB ALAM @ AFTAB MIYAN – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CR. MISC. 16988/2020



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16988 of 2020

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2018 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran

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

Aftab Alam @ Aftab Miyan S/o Jainul Miyan Resident of Village- Majhariya,

P.S.- Majhaulia, Distt- West Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyavrat Verma, APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

4

05-01-2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offences

punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8

of the POCSO Act in connection with Bairiya P.S. Case No. 133 of

2018.

Allegation against the petitioner is of commission of rape

on a minor girl inducing her for marriage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

allegation is palpably false one. Just to pressurize for marriage the

allegation was levelled. Thereafter, the victim got married with some

other man that is why even after notice she had not appeared.

Petitioner is in custody since 29.11.2019.

Since the victim was a dumb girl as well as a minor her

statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. could not be recorded by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16988 of 2020(4) dt.05-01-2021

2/2

Magistrate. Since she was minor her consent or no consent was

immaterial.

Considering the nature of material against the petitioner, I

am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer

for bail is refused.

The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and

conclude the same within nine months.

The Superintendent of Police, West Champaran, shall

ensure production of the prosecution witnesses on each and every

date of the trial, failing which explanation shall be submitted for non-

compliance of the order of this Court.

Mkr./-

(Birendra Kumar, J)

U

T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top