Andeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9657 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2022 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== ANDEEP KUMAR SON OF LATE RAMJINISH PRASAD R/O VILL.- KORAIYA, P.S.- JHAROKHAR (GHORASAHAN), DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajeev Nayan, App,231 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 376, 307, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is of establishing physical relationship with the informant at the instance of solemnization of marriage. It is further alleged that when the petitioner told her that he has already married then the informant came back from the house of the petitioner and next day all the accused persons assaulted her and ousted from the house.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9657 of 2023(3) dt.07-07-2023 2/2 that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. The petitioner and the victim have consensual relationship with each other at the instance of solemnization of marriage but the petitioner retracted from his statement and thereafter, assaulted the informant. He further submitted that in respect of assaulting to the victim, the doctor opined that injury is simple in nature. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. He is languishing in judicial custody since 26.11.2022. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned in connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 506 of 2022.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T