Parvindra @ Parvindra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2650 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1908 Year-2019 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPurnia ====================================================== PARVINDRA @ PARVINDRA KUMAR SINGH S/O RAJENDRA SINGH R/V- KAUWA TOLI, P.S.- ANGARH, DISTRICT- PURNEA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

NIRMALA DEVI W/O RAJENDRA SINGH R/V- KAUWA TOLI, P.S.- ANGARH, DISTRICT- PURNEA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Ranjan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Nirmala Kumari, APP.

Mr. Nishikant, Adv.

Mr. Anand Kumar Tiwari, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-02-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner and co-accused Tafzil Ajmal entered the house of the complainant and tried to outrage her modesty.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2650 of 2023(2) dt.09-02-2023 2/3 general and omnibus in nature. The entire allegations are false and concocted. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner regarding out-raging her modesty rather this specific allegation is against co-accused Tafzil Ajmal. It is further submitted that that the complaint was filed under Section 376 & 323 of the Indian Penal Code but the cognizance has been taken under Section 354 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that from the perusal of the complaint petition, no ingredient of Section 354 is made out against the petitioner. His name has been transpired in this case merely on suspicion. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that there is specific overt act against the petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments of the parties, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2650 of 2023(2) dt.09-02-2023 3/3 the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 1908 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T