Yogesh Pandey @ Yugesh Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1346 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2024 Thana- CHAND District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Yogesh Pandey @ Yugesh Pandey S/O Hari Pandey R/V- Bhararikhurd (Dedhua), P.S- Chand, Distt.- Kaimur.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Hirani Kuer W/O Late Santu Ram R/V Dedhua, P.O- Bhararikhurd, P.SChand, Distt.- Kaimur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. Public Prosecutor Mr. Praduman Pathak, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-09-2024 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, respondent No. 2 and Spl. Public Prosecutor.

2. This criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 07.02.2024 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua in ABP No. 133 of 2024 arising out of Chand P.S. Case No. 01 of 2024, registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.

3. As per prosecution case, on 01.01.2024 at about 5

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1346 of 2024(4) dt.12-09-2024 2/2 PM, while the daughter of informant went to attend nature's call, this appellant tried to outrage her modesty and on protest, he assaulted her and abused by caste name.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant denies the allegation and submits that as a matter of fact, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, family members of the informant abused and assaulted appellant and others for which appellant's side immediately made a complaint but they did not lodge the F.I.R. Appellant claims clean antecedent.

5. However, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific allegation that this appellant not only tried to outrage modesty of the minor daughter of informant but also assaulted her and abused her by caste name.

6. Considering the gravity of accusation, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned court below and as such, the appeal, which has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail, is hereby, rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T