IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.96 of 2011
ROSHAN KUMAR @ VIKKY KUMAR S/O- SHANKAR THAKUR, R/O-
VILLAGE BHALUI, P.S.- CHANAN, DISTT. LAKHISARAI UNDER THE
GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS GRANDFATHER DASHRATH THAKUR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
- ----------
5 14.03.2011
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
State.
Petitioner is declared juvenile in conflict with law. He
is facing charge under Sections 363, 366, 376, 377 and 34 of
Indian Penal Code. Allegation is that he, by deceitful means,
abducted/kidnapped the wife of the complainant-informant and
took her to Delhi where he committed rape on her under threat.
The girl was subsequently produced before the Magistrate for
recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. Said
statement is on record as Annexure-2.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from
the materials on record, this much is evident that the victim and
the petitioner are related to each other. It is submitted that
because of animosity between the two families, the present
complaint/F.I.R. has been lodged with concocted allegations
few days after the occurrence. It is next submitted that he is in
custody/remand home since 9.8.2010.
Learned Appellate Court in paragraph 6 observed as
under:
“Considering the submissions urged
at the bar going through impugned order, L.C.R.,
case diary and the statement of the victim
recorded U/S 164 Cr.P.C. it is manifest that the
2victim has supported the allegation that the
appellant forcibly took away her to New Delhi,
kept her confined for a month and committed
rape and unnatural offence against her consent
after causing threats which goes to indicate the
criminal behaviour of the appellant. It is alleged
that the appellant is the cousin of the victim and
the victim boarded the train after reposing faith
upon the appellant and believing his version and
thereby she was forced to surrender at the will of
the appellant and further considering that the
Juvenile Justice Board after considering that
release of the appellant is likely to bring the
appellant in association of known criminals and
there is likelihood of his moral and physical
danger which may ruin the character and career
of the juvenile and as such Juvenile Justice
Board has rightly rejected the prayer of release
of the appellant on bail. This court is also of the
opinion that the release of the appellant will not
be beneficial for the interest of the juvenile as
well as for the interest of the society and keeping
the appellant confined in the remand home is
better solution for his reform. In the result finding
no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby
dismissed.”
Having heard both the parties and after perusal of
the materials on record, this Court, for the present, is in
agreement with the view taken by the Appellate Court.
The application is dismissed.
Petitioner is, however, granted liberty to renew
prayer for bail in the Court below, if the trial does not
record/register adequate progress within seven months from
the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In case
such prayer is made, the same shall be considered on its own
merit uninfluenced by the present order.
pkj (Kishore K. Mandal, J)