Patna High Court – Orders
Murari Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 16 June, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Ashok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.1117 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Rohan Kumar Son of Mangal Mandal R/o Village- Malikpur, P.S.- Jalley,
District- Darbhanga
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX C/o Ram Das R/O Malikpur, P.S.- Jalley, Dist.- Darbhanga.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1222 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga
======================================================
MURARI KUMAR S/O- LATE JOGI DAS @ LATE YOUGI DAS Village-
Malikpur Ps- Jalley Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX C/o- Ram Das Village- Malikpur Ps- Jalley Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 93 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Sagar Kumar @ Sagar Sahni S/o- Mahesh Sahni Village- Malikpur Ps- Jalley
Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX C/o Ram Das R/o vill - Malikpur, P.S.- Jaley, Distt.- Darbhanga
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1117 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rudal Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, APP
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1222 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 93 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, APP
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
2/8
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
6 16-06-2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This Court had earlier issued notice to the
informant-respondent no.2. The notice has been validly served,
however, she has not entered appearance to oppose the prayer
for suspension of sentence and release of the appellants on bail .
3. The appellants in these three appeals are seeking
suspension of their sentence and release on bail during
pendency of the appeal. They are in incarceration for a little
more than five years.
4. The appellants have been convicted and sentenced
vide order dated 26.07.2024 and 30.07.2024 respectively passed
by learned Exclusive Special Judge, (POCSO) Act, Darbhanga
in POCSO G.R. Case No. 20 of 2020 arising out of Jalley
(Darbhanga) P.S. Case No. 58 of 2020 of whereby and
whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offences
punishable under Sections 341/34, 506/34, 354B/34 and 376D
of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC‘) and Sections 6 read
with 5(g) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
3/8
(POCSO) Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for twenty years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- for the offence
under Section 376D of IPC and in default of payment of fine,
they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
For brevity sake, sentences awarded under other Sections of IPC
and POCSO are not being mentioned.
Prosecution Story
5. The prosecution case is based on the written
application/information submitted by the victim (‘X’/PW-1)
who has stated that she is aged about sixteen years and is
resident of Darbhanga. On 24/25.04.2020 in the night at 10:00
PM, she was going to her new house for sleeping with her
grandmother, on the way near Manrega Bhawan, Murari Kumar
and Indrajeet Das were playing obscene song on mobile. It is
alleged that while she moved forward, both of them started
following her and when she reached near the house of Murari
then Murari from behind pressed her mouth and Indrajeet
caught her both hands and they took her to the gachhi of
Ghayanis Das. It is alleged that along with these accused
persons, Sagar Kumar, Ashok Kumar and Rohan Kumar came
there, tied her mouth with cloth and all of them committed rape
upon the victim one by one. They also made her video and told
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
4/8
if she tells about this to anyone then they will make this video
viral. The informant alleges that thereafter the accused persons
brought her on vehicle and left her in a field and fled away. The
informant came to her house and narrated the entire incidence to
her mother. Her mother went to the villagers and panches but
the panches refused to interfere.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that in
this case, the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place in
the night of 24/25.04.2020. According to the victim, the
appellants had left her in the field and fled away whereafter she
came to her house and disclosed the occurrence to her mother
who approached the co-villagers and panches but the panches
refused to do anything. It is submitted that the written
information was given to the police station only on 08.05.2020
i.e. after about thirteen days of the occurrence.
7. Learned counsel further submits that the victim
(‘X’) was examined as PW-1. In her examination-in-chief, the
victim has stated that she had not disclosed the occurrence in
her house and her family members came to know about the
occurrence after the same was made viral through video.
8. Learned counsel further submits that in course of
evidence, the prosecution proved the admission register of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
5/8
victim of her admission in Class-IX in the school which was on
the basis of Transfer Certificate issued by the earlier school but
neither the said Transfer Certificate nor the admission register of
the first school, namely, Madhya Vidyalaya, Malikpur was
proved.
9. It is pointed out that the victim girl has stated in
paragraph ’48’ of her her cross-examination that at least from
one year prior to the lodging of the case, she was having an
affair with one Ranjeet Sahni. The defence has suggested that
she was in affair with Ranjeet Sahni and was making physical
relationship with him which was opposed by the accused
persons/appellants in this case and for this reason at the instance
of Ranjeet Sahni, they have been falsely implicated.
10. Learned counsel submits that the medical
evidence of the victim girl does not suggest any recent sign of
sexual act. The Doctor (PW-8) who examined the victim girl did
not find any internal or external injury. His observation was that
there was no discharge per vaginal discharge seen. Hymen was
torn, old healed tear seen. In her opinion, PW-8 has stated that
according to the radiological findings, the bone age of victim
was between 16-17 years and based on pathological and
sonographic findings, no sign of intra and extra uterine
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
6/8
pregnancy was found then recent sexual intercourse cannot be
proved on the basis of the findings. It is, thus, submitted that the
doctor has not found any sign of rape and the victim girl in this
case has deviated from her earlier statement in the written
information on various aspects of the matter, therefore, she
would not fall in the category of sterling witness.
11. It is pointed out that the undergarments of the
victim girl were sent to the FSL. Those were marked Exhibit
‘P/1’, ‘P/2’ and ‘P/3’ and ‘P/4’. The FSL report clearly stated
that blood could not be detected in these exhibits and even
semen could not be detected in the exhibits. It is pointed out that
the FSL report says that semen has been exhibited in Exhibit
marked ‘C/1’. The said Exhibit ‘C/1′ is the janghia of another
accused Indrajeet who is not before this Court. So far as the
clothes of these appellants are concerned, they were also sent
to FSL but neither any blood nor any semen could be detected
on their clothes. These appellants were also examined by the
Doctor (PW-10) but the doctor did not find any injury or
suspicious stain or foreign hairs over the clothes and any part of
the body including genitals. It is pointed out that in her own
cross-examination, PW-1 has stated in paragraph ’47’ that she
had given information to her family on 7 th April. In her
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
7/8
evidence, she has stated that she had become unconscious and
returned next day whereas again she says that she returned in
the night itself, therefore her story based on which conviction
has been done is not consistent.
12. Learned Additional P.P. for the State has opposed
the prayer for suspension of sentence and release of the
appellants on bail. It is submitted that in course of investigation,
the police had seized some mobile phones and the prosecution
has proved some CDs with certificate under Section 65B of the
Indian Evidence Act, however, it is not denied that the person
who prepared the CD has not been examined in this case and
there is no evidence that from which primary source this CD has
been prepared.
13. Having regard to the submissions noted
hereinabove and the materials which we have prima facie gone
through, taking note of the changing stand of the victim (‘X’)
with regard to the manner of occurrence, there being no medical
evidence suggesting commission of rape on the victim and
admission on the part of the victim that she was in an affair with
one Ranjeet Sahni, there being defence that because her
relationship with Ranjeet Sahni was opposed by these appellants
so they have been framed in this case, the medical evidence and
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1117 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2025
8/8
the FSL report are not connecting the appellants with the alleged
crime and they are in custody for over five years, we find it a
case for suspension of sentence and release on bail. Accordingly,
we direct suspension of sentence and release of the appellants
on bail during pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Exclusive Special Judge, (POCSO) Act, Darbhanga in
POCSO G.R. Case No. 20 of 2020 arising out of Jalley
(Darbhanga) P.S. Case No. 58 of 2020.
14. Fine, if any, imposed as part of the sentence shall
remain suspended during pendency of these appeals.
15. It is clarified that the observations made
hereinabove are only prima-facie and tentative in nature for
purpose of consideration of the prayer of appellants for bail
which would not cause prejudice to either of the parties.
16. List these appeals for hearing on their turn.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Rishi/-
U T