Akshay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15832 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-420 Year-2023 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== AKSHAY KUMAR SON OF MANGRU RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - TRIBHUWANI SOHARA, P.S. - BARAHARA (KRISHNAGARH), DISTRICT - BHOJPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amarendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shaheen Begum ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter-in-law of the informant is said to have eloped with the petitioner.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case merely on suspicion. There is delay of seven days in lodging the F.I.R. without giving any explanation. It is further submitted that the victim has given wrong statement under Section 164 Cr.p.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15832 of 2024(3) dt.10-04-2024 2/2 in the influence of her family to save honour. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 22.07.2023.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case and considering the nature of the offence, the petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T