Bittu @ Nabi vs. The State Of Bihar
Held
The Court granted bail to the petitioner. While acknowledging the prosecution's case that the petitioner attempted to take the girl to an unknown destination, the Court considered the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents and his engagement in the crockery business. The Court also noted that the petitioner had been in custody since September 27, 2018. The bail was granted on the condition that the bailors must be local traders registered with GST, indicating a pragmatic approach to ensuring community ties and accountability. The specific legal arguments regarding the applicability of Section 366A IPC and POCSO Act were not definitively ruled upon, as the decision focused on the bail application's merits.
Facts
The petitioner, Bittu @ Nabi, sought bail in connection with Halsi (Ramgarh Chowk) P.S. Case No. 158 of 2018. The case involves offences under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner claimed the victim was a major and that the charges were not attracted. He also stated he had no criminal antecedent and had been in custody since September 27, 2018. The prosecution case indicated an attempt by the petitioner to take the girl to an unknown destination instead of her house. The petitioner is a trader engaged in the crockery business.
Key Issues
1. Whether Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act are attracted in the present case, considering the victim's age and the circumstances of the alleged incident? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the victim was a major and therefore, no case under Section 366A of the IPC or the POCSO Act was made out. He emphasized his lack of criminal antecedents and his period of custody. Revenue/State's Argument: The State, through the prosecution case as recorded in the case diary and the victim's statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., contended that the petitioner attempted to take the girl to an unknown destination, which supported the charges.
Sections Cited
Section 366A, Section 4, Section 6
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 3 29-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with Halsi (Ramgarh Chowk) P.S. Case No. 158 of 2018 for the offence under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim is a major. Referring to the prosecution case, he submits that no case under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and POCSO Act is attracted in the instant case. He submits that the p
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.