Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.69 of 2012 Md. Sahadat , son of Md. Kare @ Kalimuddin Resident of Village- Mohammad Nagar Rajdhani, P.S.-Falka, District- Katihar. …….. Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar ………. Opposite Party. ---------------------------------- 2 16.01.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The present application has been filed for grant of bail to the petitioner under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The petitioner is accused in Falka P.S. Case No. 99 of 2011 registered under [STATUTE] . The prayer for bail was earlier rejected by order dated 5.11.2011 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Katihar and the Appeal was also dismissed by order dated 2.12.2011 by the Sessions Judge, Katihar in Criminal Appeal No. 54 of 2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been declared to be a Juvenile and his age has been assessed as 15 years and 9 months on the date of occurrence. 2 Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the only allegation is that he dragged the informant in the Aangan and tried to commit rape. In the meantime cousin sister of the informant came and raised alarm on which other persons came. The petitioner tried to run away but he was caught by the villagers and brought to the police station. Learned counsel submits that in a small place in the district of Katihar, it is unlikely that the informant’s mother in law and father-in-law were at the shop till so late and the informant was alone at her house. He also submits that as per the FIR itself it is stated that there was a Panchayati and when petitioner refused to accept the same then only the FIR was lodged. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner this is indicative of the fact that the FIR has been lodged for ulterior motive/purposes in as much as if the petitioner had agreed to the terms of the alleged pachayat then the FIR would not have been lodged and thus it clearly shows that the informant and her family members were trying to get 3 undue advantage from the petitioner and his family members and when the same was resisted, the FIR was lodged. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 26.6.2011. Learned A.P.P. on the other hand submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent and he was also involved in Falka P.S. Case No. 80/2009 which was registered under [STATUTE] . Learned counsel for the petitioner in reply to this contention submits that in the said case, the petitioner has already been granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Board itself and that the petitioner was not the sole accused and the allegation was with regard to others also. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Katihar. One of the bailors should be the father of the 4 petitioner, who shall also execute a bond before the Court with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner. The petitioner shall physically present himself before the Probation Officer, Katihar at least once a month and also as and when directed by him. The Probation Officer, Katihar shall maintain strict supervision over the petitioner. The application accordingly stands disposed off. Sudha (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 377

Statute Text:
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. Unnatural offences. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.