Md. Sadre Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17075 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== MD. SADRE ALAM S/o Md. Manzoor R/o village- Katasa, P.S.- Singhwars, Distt.- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad Mr. Ratnakar Jha Mr. Abhishek Raj ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-09-2022 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 376, 354C, 323, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner used to visit the house of the informant and in the meantime love affair developed between the informant and the petitioner. On the pretext of marriage, the petitioner forcibly committed rape upon the informant and also took photograph of the informant. It is further alleged that when the informant pressurized for marriage, the informant threatened

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17075 of 2022(4) dt.26-09-2022 2/2 her that he shall viral the video.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He further submits that no complaint petition has been filed by the informant from two years. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent, which is also mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that during the pendency of the bail application procedure under sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C has been completed by the court below. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. This application is accordingly, dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T