Sujeet Kumar @ Anku Singh @ Anko Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24857 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Sujeet Kumar @ Anku Singh @ Anko Singh, aged about 24 yeasrs, SexMale, S/o Lal Babu Singh, R/o village- Gyaspur, P.S.- Paru, DistrictMuzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kavita Kumari D/o Ram Briksh Sahani, R/o village- Fatehabad, P.S.- Paru, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anish Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-08-2019 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. 59 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that the informant Kavita Kumari besides the other allegations has alleged in her written application that she was in visiting terms at the Sasural of her cousin sister Shobha Devi, where she fell in love with petitioner Sujit Kumar and he established physical relation with her on several times on the pretext of marrying her and ultimately, her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24857 of 2019(3) dt.21-08-2019 2/2 marriage was solemnized with him in a temple and thereafter, he took her at Rajasthan where she became pregnant. Thereafter, Sujit Kumar took her at Muzaffarpur and kept in a rented room and she blessed with a female child. Thereafter, father of Sujit Kumar and his other family members by hatching conspiracy attempted to kill her and her daughter. Later on, second marriage of Sujit Kumar was fixed with another girl namely Kajal Kumari.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no offence made against the petitioner. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the case diary, the informant has already married with another person in the year 2008.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the court below is directed to consider and dispose of the bail petition of the petitioner on its own merit on the same day.

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