Priyanka Priyadarshini v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.325 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-800 Year-2017 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== PRIYANKA PRIYADARSHINI D/o Vimlendu Chaubey R/o Mohalla- Civil Line, Sasaram, P.S.- Sasaram Model, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Alok Kumar Tiwari S/o Surendra Tiwari Arsh Muti Specialty Nursing Home Rauja Road, Sadaram, Permanent Address- Village- Atarwalya, P.S.- Mohaniya, District- Kaimur, Bhabhua ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gautam Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 29-06-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defects within four weeks as pointed out by office. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State on merit.

This application has been filed for setting aside the order dated 15.02.2020 passed in A.B.P. No. 2123/2019 (arising out of Complaint Case No. 800/2017) by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-XII, Sasaram at Rohtas whereby and whereunder the prayer for anticipatory bail of the opposite party no. 2 has been allowed.

On perusal of the records, it appears that the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 are wife and husband respectively.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.325 of 2020(4) dt.29-06-2022 2/3 They are not having good relationship and as it appears they are fighting litigation including one for maintenance and custody of children. The complainant-petitioner alleges that the opposite party no. 2 being Director of one Aarsh Multi Specialty Nursing Home where the petitioner was working as a Ayush doctor/advisor doctor till 05.05.2017 has cheated the innocent patients by accepting money in the name of treatment by the complainant-petitioner. It is alleged that opposite party no. 2 has pasted the hoarding showing name of the petitioner in several places of the town and even letter head has been printed in the name of the petitioner. It is alleged that somebody else is using the letter head by impersonating the petitioner and opposite party no.

2 doing surgery without taking interest in the patient. A perusal of the complaint petition does not mention any specific case of surgery conducted by opposite party no. 2 in the name of the complainant-petitioner. In the opinion of this court, in the nature of allegations and considering that the petitioner and opposite party no.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.325 of 2020(4) dt.29-06-2022 3/3 opposite party no. 2.

This Revision Application has, thus, no merit. It is dismissed, accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.