Patna High Court - Orders
Mantoo Paswan vs The State Of Bihar on 6 July, 2011
Author: Rajendra Kumar Mishra
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.21378 of 2011
Mantoo Paswan, son of Rambilash Paswan, resident of village-
Kathutiya, P.S. Mufassil, Aurangabad, District-Aurangabad.
.................................................................Petitioner.
Versus
The State Of Bihar.................................Opposite Party.
-----------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Mrs. Ansuiya Jaiswal, A.P.P.
----------
2. 6.7.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No.187 of 2010 registered under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of his co-villagers. It has also been submitted that the informant and grand father of the petitioner were also facing Mufassil P.S. Case Number Non F.I.R. No.112 of 2009 under Section 107 Cr.P.C. It has further been contended that the victim was examined by the doctor, who has not found any external injury or mark of violence on the private part of the 2 body of the victim. So the entire prosecution story is false.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed unnatural offence with Prince Kumar, aged about 5 years, the son of the informant, Sikandar Paswan.
It appears from the order dated 16.4.2011 passed by the Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, whereby the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was dismissed, that as per medical report of the victim "sign of anal penetration by firm mass present through sodomy cannot be denied."
Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected. However, it is made clear that the trial court will not be prejudiced by this order at the time of hearing of the regular bail petition of the petitioner and the same shall be disposed of on its own merit taking into consideration the nature of the offence.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S.