Ranjan Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6562 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2022 Thana- TANDWA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.

RANJAN MEHTA Son of Late Sita Ram Mehta R/v- Harihar Urdana (Garh Par), P.S.- Tandawa, District- Aurangabad 2.

SONI DEVI Wife of Ranjan Mehta R/v- Harihar Urdana (Garh Par), P.S.- Tandawa, District- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioners.

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 11-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Tandawa P.S. Case No.123/22 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376/420/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of POCSO Act and Section 3

(1) (r) (s) (w) (i) & 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The allegation against petitioners is that they are involved in aiding and abating the offence of penetrative sexual assault with a minor girl aged about 161⁄2 years. The petitioners are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case due to previous grudge. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6562 of 2023(2) dt.11-04-2023 2/2 allegations levelled against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that merely the perusal of the F.I.R. will go to show that the name of the petitioners have been taken in a sweeping way which cannot establish the offence in itself. Both the petitioners are husband and wife and have no criminal antecedent.

Per contra, learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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