Yogendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26858 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2018 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas ====================================================== YOGENDRA RAM SON OF MAHADEO RAM R/O VILLAGE- BOKSHA, P.S.- BUXAR MUFASSIL, DISTRICT- BUXAR.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

ARTI DEVI WIFE OF YOGENDRA RAM AND DAUGHTER OF SURENDRA RAM R/O VILLAGEBOKSHA, P.S.- BUXAR MUFASSIL,DISTRICT- BUXAR, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILLAGE AND P.O.- AAGARED KALA, P.S.- SURYAPURA, DISTRICT- ROHTAS. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawnit Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No. 132 of 2018 registered under Sections 341, 323, 498A/34 of the I.P.C. and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that petitioner is named in the first information report. There is direct

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26858 of 2021(6) dt.17-05-2022 2/2 allegation of torture and cruelty for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is rejected. shailendra/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T