Rajnish Patel @ Rajnish Chaudhary @ Rajnish Chuadhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17109 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2022 Thana- AGIAON BAZAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Rajnish Patel @ Rajnish Chaudhary @ Rajnish Chuadhary Son of Manoj Chaudhary @ Ghurahu Resident of Village - Chaturbhuji Baraon, P.S.- Piro, District - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Manisha Kumari Daughter Of Dinesh Patel Resident Of Village- Kewatiya, Ps- Agion Bazar, Distt- Bhojpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate For the OP no. 2 :
Mr.Nagendra Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Khurshid Anwar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-09-2023 Heard both parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Agiaon Bazar P.S. Case No. 190 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the victim (informant) was subjected to repeated sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage. It is further alleged that this petitioner made video clip of the incident and started blackmailing her.
4. It is submitted by the counsel for petitioner that both parties are major and relationship was consensual and only with a view to put pressure upon the petitioner to solemnize
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17109 of 2023(4) dt.26-09-2023 2/2 marriage with the informant, this false and concocted case has been lodged. It is further submitted that father of petitioner has also filed a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 91 of 2023 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arrah, Bhojpur against informant and others. It is further submitted that petitioner is a married man and by doing private job he earns his livelihood for maintaining his family. It is lastly, submitted that no such occurrence as alleged in the FIR has ever taken place.
5. Considering the facts aforesaid and gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T