Navi Hasan @ Md. Navi Hasan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13520 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-438 Year-2022 Thana- TRIVENIGANJ District- Supaul ====================================================== NAVI HASAN @ MD. NAVI HASAN S/O LATE MD. NAZIR MIAN @ LATE MD. NAZIR @ NAJEER MIYA R/O VILLAGE- ITWA, WARD NO. 13, P.S- PRATAPGANJ, DISTT.- SUPAUL.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-10-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned A.P.P., at the outset, submits that when the case was taken up on 30.09.2024, a counter affidavit on behalf of the Superintendent of Police, Supaul was filed wherein a specific pleading was made at para 7 that despite best endeavours the petitioner could not be contacted till date. It was further submitted that petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation when he has already been given interim protection by this Court. It was next submitted that petitioner should cooperate in the investigation when he has no apprehension of arrest. Learned A.P.P. next submits that the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13520 of 2024(8) dt.03-10-2024 2/2 that petitioner and the victim had married and they are leading a peaceful conjugal life and the victim would be produced before the investigating officer of the case on order before 02.10.2024.

4. Today when the case is taken up, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that no doubt the petitioner and the victim had married and they were leading a peaceful conjugal life but then victim is missing and petitioner is not aware of her whereabouts on which learned A.P.P. submits that since the victim is missing which creates a doubt with regard to the conduct of the petitioner. It is further submitted that investigation of the case in its nascent stages and the victim till date has not been recovered.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 438 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Supaul/Successor Court.

6. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T