Vikash Yadav @ Vikesh @ Vikesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7962 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-490 Year-2021 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya ====================================================== VIKASH YADAV @ VIKESH @ VIKESH YADAV SON OF RAMBALI YADAV R/O VILLAGE- SAWASIN, P.S.- TEKARI (PANCHANPUR O.P.), AND DISTRICT- GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No.2, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Tekari (Panchanpur O.P.) P.S. Case No.490 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 325 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Allegedly, the petitioner has tried to molest the daughter of the informant and when she raised alarm, he tried to kill her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7962 of 2022(2) dt.01-08-2022 2/2 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 due to local politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. In fact, there is a love affair between the petitioner and the daughter of the informant, which was not acceptable to the informant, hence, he implicated the petitioner in this case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there is a serious nature of allegation against the petitioner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. This application is accordingly dismissed.

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