← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13789/2017rejected

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Singh @ Rohit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-24Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.13789 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -82 Year- 2016 Thana -RAMGARHWA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Singh @ Rohit Kumar Singh Son of Brahma Singh, Resident of village - Dhanhar, Dihuli, P.S. Ramgarhwa, District - East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-05-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No. 82/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 354(A), 354(B), 436 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that while she was cooking food, Rohit Kumar (petitioner), Brahma Singh, Pappu Singh and others came and started misbehaving and torn her clothes in order to outrage her modesty, then brother of the informant Jayshankar Kumar Singh objected. Thereafter, petitioner assaulted him with Farsa on his left hand. Brahma Singh also assaulted her brother on his right hand with Farsa.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13789 of 2017 (3) dt.24-05-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is counter version. The petitioner is agnate of the husband of the informant. The injuries found on the person of Jayshankar Kumar Singh are simple in nature, but it appears that it was the petitioner who has also entered into the house of the informant along with other accused persons with intention to outrage her modesty and the petitioner also assaulted brother of the informant. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and pray for regular bail, learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T