Laxman Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18813 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2015 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya ====================================================== Laxman Prasad, Son of Late Deepchand Saw, Resident of Village and Post - Banji, P.S.- Mandu, District - Ramgarh (Jharkhand). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kunwar Narayan Jamuar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2015 registered under Sections 354(C) and 379 Indian Penal Code, Section 11 of the POCSO Act and Sections 66(A), 66(E), 67(A) and 67(B) of the T.T. Act. The accusation is that Sikha Priya, daughter of the informant, Seema Kumari, was studying in class-XII at City Public School. Before 5-6 months, her daughter got unconscious on 2-3 occasions in the school. In the meantime, on her mobile nos. 8521232097 and 9155218686 called was received through mobile nos. 9234307083 and 8409508882 talking filthy language due to that reason she changed her both SIMS. Thereafter, from three different mobile numbers, calls came at her mobile. In the last week of march,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18813 of 2019(4) dt.25-06-2019 2/2 petitioner, who was school P.T. Teacher, after taking objectionable photographs of her daughter sent to the mobile of her relatives. When informant made query from her daughter then her daughter disclosed that P.T. Teacher (petitioner) near game room forcible took her objectionable photographs and tried to outrage her modesty. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, in fact, there was love affairs in between the petitioner and the daughter of the informant and before one year, petitioner left his school in 2014 but with ulterior motive the present case has been lodged with false allegation.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T