Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9976/2020dismissed

Hari Baitha v. The State Of Bihar

2020-10-13Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9976 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2019 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

HARI BAITHA Son of Late Mahindra Baitha, 2.

Chotan Kuswaha @ Chhotan Kushwaha, son of Late Chanardeo Kushwaha, Both Residents of Village - Khairwa, P.S. Riga, District - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-10-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case in brief is that as per FIR on 07.10.2019 the informant/victim Chanchal Kumari aged about 15 years was returning after worship of Goddess Durga. In the way near Khairava School petitioners caught her with ill motive took her near a bridge. After trying her mouth and tried to commit some offence but anyhow she fled away from there and told her mother about the occurrence. Again on 08.10.2019 when she was taking water at hand-pipe, both petitioners came

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9976 of 2020(5) dt.13-10-2020 2/2 there and started to misbehave with her and threatened her to kill her brother and kidnapped her.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail petition.

I have perused the record and case diary, the victim has given her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have supported the prosecution case.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners are rejected in connection with Riga P.S. Case No. 275 of 2019 from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Sitamarhi. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

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