IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.1121 of 2011
PANKAJ SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.
-----------
03/ 31.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Addl. P.P. for the State.
Allegedly, petitioner attempted to commit rape upon a
minor girl aged about seven years.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is
that according to the prosecution case itself, the alleged occurrence
took place on 2.10.2010 but the written report was given on
12.10.2010 i.e. ten days after the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel
further drew my attention towards para 39 of the case diary in which
the statement of one witness Gurujang Ram has been incorporated.
The aforesaid witness has stated about false implication of the
petitioner in the alleged crime.
It appears from perusal of the case diary that not only
informant but the victim as well as some other witnesses have also
supported the prosecution case. So far delay in lodging of the first
information report is concerned, the explanation is also given in the
written report of the informant itself.
Considering the aforesaid circumstances as well as
submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with
Aurangabad (M) P.S. Case no.184/2010 stands rejected.
Since the petitioner is in jail custody since 12.10.2010, the
-2-
trial of he petitioner should be expedited and disposed of preferably,
within six months from the date of receipt of this order and if trial of
the petitioner is not concluded within the above stated period, the
petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)