Mithilesh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14194 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2020 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== MITHILESH KUMAR YADAV S/O RAMCHANDRA YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-MAJAHA, RAGHUNATHPUR, WARD NO. 4, P.S.- BHARGAMA, DISTRICT-ARARIA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Prasad Mr. Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 04-07-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects, if any, pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the informant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 188 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 344, 325, 498A, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is husband of the informant. As per FIR, the informant had purchased a piece of land. Her husband,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14194 of 2021(6) dt.04-07-2022 2/3 the petitioner was making pressure on the informant to transfer the land in his name. Meanwhile, the petitioner sold the land belonging to his grand-father. The grand-father of the petitioner had already gifted that land in favour of the informant. Due to that dispute on 29.03.2020, the petitioner and other named accused persons along with six unknown persons came to the house of the informant and forcibly lifted her son and daughter. They badly assaulted the son and daughter of the informant and the informant herself.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is not a case of matrimonial dispute, rather it is a matter of domestic violence.

The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that due to torture inflicted by the petitioner and also due to fact that the petitioner has solemnized his second marriage, the informant has filed a case for a decree of divorce against the petitioner. He has also submitted that the case diary has been received and the injuries suffered by the informant at the hand of the petitioner, are grievous in nature.

The injury report annexed with the case diary shows that the informant was badly assaulted and she has sustained grievous injuries, as such, the petitioner does not deserve the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14194 of 2021(6) dt.04-07-2022 3/3 privileges for anticipatory bail and accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/Aditi U T