Nishi Kant Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.17258 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -61 Year- 2016 Thana -BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBHAGALPUR ====================================================== Nishi Kant Jha S/o Pawan Jha R/o Mohalla- Zila School Campus, P.S. Adampur, District Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M. Dayal (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 03-05-2016 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Dayal, APP for the State.
The petitioner along with one named and few others unnamed are accused of Kotwali (Adampur) P.S. Case No. 61 of 2016, G.R. No. 488/2016, registered under Sections 354, 354(A) and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code. While the informant along with her husband was returning home, it is alleged that she was intercepted by co-accused Kranti Yadav and others. They abused and slapped her and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- demanded as ransom. The petitioner slapped the informant and forcibly took away a sum of Rs. 8,000/- from her bag.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17258 of 2016 (2) dt.03-05-2016 2/2 Contention of the petitioner is that earlier to this, the lady had lodged a case against the petitioner vide Kotwali P.S. Case No. 41/2016, in which he was granted bail. Out of animosity, the present case is lodged. It is also stated that a sanha (informatory petition) filed by the petitioner on 11.02.2016 against the informant and others vide Annexure-2. Learned APP on the other hand opposed the prayer and submitted that not only the ransom was demanded, but on refusal, the lady was slapped and certain amount forcibly took away by the petitioner from her possession.
Considering the nature of the allegations and other materials reflected from the record including the impugned order, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. The prayer is rejected.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) rohit/- U T