Ranjit Kumar @ Guddu Shah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22242 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2020 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Guddu Shah, Male, Aged 33 years, Son of Bhola Shah, Resident of Mohalla - Ramkrishna colony, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rudra Deo, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Smt. Rita Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-08-2020 Heard Mr. Rudra Deo, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mrs. Rita Kumari, the learned Additional P.P. on the petition.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Special Case No.69/2020, arising out of Bahadurpur P.S. Case No.60 of 2020, registered under Sections 448, 354(B) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 8/12 of the POCSO Act. The informant alleged that on 20.03.2020 at about 7.30 in the night, the petitioner was in inebriated condition and he entered into the house of the informant. The petitioner tried to outrage the modesty of the wife and daughter of the informant. The informant further alleged that the petitioner had earlier also did the same acts but when the informant raised protest, the petitioner left the house.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22242 of 2020(2) dt.17-08-2020 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a tenant in the house of Sahdeo Mahto. There is dispute of a wall and at the instance of Sahdeo Mahto, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that now the good sense has prevailed and both sides entered into a compromise and they also filed a compromise petition but there is specific allegation that the petitioner had repeatedly in inebriated condition entered into the house of the informant and tried to misbehave and outrage the modesty of the wife and daughter of the informant.

Taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below, the learned court below shall consider the regular bail of the petitioner without being prejudiced from the order of this Court. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T