High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sanjay Mahto @ Dakua vs The State Of Bihar on 5 July, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Sanjay Mahto @ Dakua vs The State Of Bihar on 5 July, 2011
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                         Criminal Appeal (DB) No.368 of 2011

          ====================================================
                        SANJAY MAHTO @ DAKUA - Appellant/s(s)
                                              Versus
                         THE STATE OF BIHAR - Respondent/s(s)
          ====================================================
                                  Appearance :
               For the Appellant/s: Mr. Vikramdev Singh, Advocate
                           For the Respondent/s: APP
          ====================================================
         CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA
                                         and
              HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA
                                     DATE: 05-07-2011
                                        ORAL ORDER

3 05/07/2011 This case has been placed for consideration of

prayer for bail of the appellant after receipt of the lower

court records.

The appellant is the sole accused who has

faced the trial and accused Murari was also an accused

but his trial was transferred before the Juvenile Justice

Board. Allegation of the victim was that she was raped

on 14.2.2009 and thereafter on protest the accused

persons poured kerosene oil upon her and one of the

accused ignited fire. The fard-beyan was recorded o

19.2.2009. Later on victim died on account of injury

inflicted upon her.

Submission is that the delay in giving fard-

beyan creates grave doubt regarding the prosecution

story. There are other contradictions also in the
2

prosecution version regarding the occurrence.

No girl will allege such allegation against any

innocent person. Fard-beyan was recorded when the

victim was undergoing treatment for her burn injury

which proved fatal.

Considering the above facts, we are not

inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. Accordingly,

his prayer for bail is rejected.

(Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.)
avin