IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42576 of 2022

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2022 Thana- FALKA District- Katihar

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

Jyotish Kumar Yadav S/O Fuleshwar Yadav Resident of village- Bharsiya,

P.S.- Falka, District- Katihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN

ORAL ORDER

2

06-12-2022

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks

from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

Falka P.S. Case No. 114 of 2022 lodged under Sections 376,

354(B)/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 4/8 of POCSO Act.

As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the

petitioner is that he has forcefully developed physical relation

with the informant when she went in the field for cutting the

grass for her cow and also prepared nacked video and

photograph and thereafter, continuously tortured to maintain the

physical relation with her. Subsequently, the petitioner has also

pressurized the informant to develop her physical relation with

other friends.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42576 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022

2/2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

submits that the contents of the F.I.R. and the contents of

statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are mis-match.

Counsel further submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is

clean and he is in custody since 11.04.2022.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for

bail and submits that the statement recorded under Section 164

of Cr.P.C. may not been very much clear but the medical report

fully supports the allegations made in the F.I.R. Counsel further

submits that till date, charge has not been framed in this case.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and

the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to

the petitioner, therefore, his bail petition is hereby rejected.

However, liberty is hereby granted that he may renew

his prayer for bail 3 months after framing of charge and the Trial

Court is directed to release him on bail thereafter, imposing its

own conditions so that he may not evade his appearance during

trial.

With this observation, the bail application stands

rejected.

sadique/-

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

U

T