Munna @ Munma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25045 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2020 Thana- DHURAIYA District- Banka ====================================================== MUNNA @ MUNMA SON OF NAGESHWAR MANDAL R/O VILLAGEPURNIA, P.S.- DHORAIYA, DIST.- BANKA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 376, 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and section 66A of the I.T. Act.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is stated to have established physical relations with the informant on the pretext of marriage. Thereafter it is stated that he recorded the incidence in the video, took photograph and continued to exploit the informant giving threats that if the informant refused, he would make the video viral.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case due to oblique reasons. The informant is a 30 year old married lady

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25045 of 2021(3) dt.08-12-2021 2/2 having three children. From the contents of the F.I.R. itself, it would transpire that the relationship was established voluntarily between the two adults. However, the petitioner was subsequently falsely implicated in the case because of land dispute between the husband of the informant and the petitioner herein. The victim was not examined medically. The petitioner is in custody since 28.7.2020 and has no criminal antecedent. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that there is direct allegation against this petitioner which is supported by the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioner together with the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T