Patna High Court - Orders
Bimlesh Ram vs The State Of Bihar on 21 January, 2020
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2495 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2013 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Bimlesh Ram S/o Ghasi Ram, R/o Village- Isri, P.S.- Durgawati, District-
Kaimur at Bhabua
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sujit Kumar Singh, Addl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2020Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Appellant in the present case has been convicted for the offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Pencal Code and has been awarded a sentence of five years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) in connection with Session Trial No. 43 of 2019 arising out of Durgawati P.S. Case No. 45 of 2013.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted for purpose of bail that the conviction of the appellant is based on inconsistent and uncorroborated testimony of the victim lady inasmuch as it would appear that the victim lady is said to have gone to attend her natural call at 8:00 PM at night hour without there being any torch in her hand and it was her case that two miscreants had tried to gag her mouth and commit rape on her Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2495 of 2019(4) dt.21-01-2020 2/3 but when she raised hulla, they ran away and that this appellant was caught while he was hiding himself. Later on in course of trial she tried to save the co-accused Paklu Ram as the changed her version and stated that she had not named Paklu Ram in course of investigation before the I.O.
It is further submission of learned counsel for the appellant that two witnesses namely Anil Kumar Pal and Chotelal Paswan who are said to have caught this appellant from a nearby place are not consistent in their testimony and Anil Kumar Pal is closely related to the victim lady.
The learned trial court has also taken note of the statement of the I.O. who has stated that the appellant was produced before him by the persons who had been assisting the informant and but has not named that person and further that the victim lady had not shown any torn cloths as was her case. It is further submitted that P.W. 1 who is the Bhaisur of the victim lady has stated that when he went on the hulla he had seen 4-5 persons fleeing away which is not consistent with the story of the victim lady. The appellant has remained in custody for a total period of 15 months.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and suspension of sentence. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2495 of 2019(4) dt.21-01-2020 3/3 Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant as noted hereinabove, at this stage this Court directs release of the appellant above named on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Session Trial No. 43 of 2019 arising out of Durgawati P.S. Case No. 45 of 2013 during pendency of the appeal.
The fine imposed shall remain suspended.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
vats/ved
U T