IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55747 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Banka

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

RISHI KUMAR S/o BHUPENDRA YADAV R/o VILLAGE-KAMALDIH,

P.S-BANKA, DISTRICT-BANKA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Saket Tiwary, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY

ORAL ORDER

3

10-05-2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant

of regular bail in a case registered under sections 376, 379 and

34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and two

others are said to have committed rape on the informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case over a

trivial dispute relating to mobile phone which would be evident

from F.I.R. as also statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.. The

narration in the F.I.R. and section 164 Cr.P.C. are at variance to

each other. There is an inordinate delay of three days in lodging

of the F.I.R. inspite of the Police Station being at a distance of

15 kilometers from the place of occurrence. The medical report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55747 of 2021(3) dt.10-05-2022

2/2

does not support the allegation in so far as no external injury

was found. Even the neibhours did not hear any sound of

screaming etc. The petitioner is in custody since 21.6.2021 and

has no criminal antecedent.

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in

the F.I.R. which has been supported by the informant in her

statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the Court is not inclined to

enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer

for bail after six months or after framing of charge, whichever is

later.

Saurabh/-

(Partha Sarthy, J)

U

T