Md. Kadir v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14094 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2020 Thana- MADHEPUR District- Madhubani ====================================================== MD. KADIR Son of Md. Ayub Resident of Village- Bochahi Punarvash, P.S.- Madhepur, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Jha Raman For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Hriday Narayan Harshit Mr.Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-12-2021 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects as pointed out by the office within a period of four weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within the stipulated time, office will place the matter before the Bench. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit in the court today.

The same is taken and kept on record.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case in connection with Madhepur P.S. Case No.118 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is of committing rape

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14094 of 2021(3) dt.21-12-2021 2/2 upon the daughter of the informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. In fact, the informant want to marry his daughter with the petitioner, but on denial, this false case has been lodged against him. At the time of medical examination, no evidence of sexual assault was found. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail by submitted that the victim has supported the prosecution case in her evidence recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner named above. The prayer for anticipatory bail by the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T