Vishwanath Raut And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33163 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1805 Year- 2015 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Vishwanath Raut Son of Late Jagdhari Raut Resident of villageBasdeopur Chandel, P.S.- Mahanar , District-Vaishali

2. Ram Briksha Mahto Son of Late Shree Chand Mahto Resident of Village-Din Buchauli, P.S.- Jandaha, District-Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rubi Devi Wife of Sri Arun Rai Resident of Village- Daruapatti, P.S.- Patepur, District- Vaishali .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 20-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1805/15 for offences alleged under Sections 323, 376/34 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation made in the complaint is that petitioners committed rape with the complainant in a mango orchard when she was going to attend the call of natural. They also snatched gold ornaments of the complainant. It has been submitted by the learned counsel

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33163 of 2016 (2) dt.20-08-2016 2/3 for the petitioners that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that both sides are inimical to each other due to some land dispute and three complaint cases have been filed by the petitioners against the complainant and in order to circumvent and counter those cases, the false allegation has been made against these petitioners. He further submits that the parties have entered into a compromise and that the petitioners have no criminal history, as is evident from paragraph 3 of this petition.

Learned counsel for the complainant, however, submits that only summons have been issued against the petitioners, hence, no ground for anticipatory bail is made out. Learned APP for the State submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioners, hence, opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioners surrender in the court of Sri Umesh Prasad, learned J.M. 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1805/2015 within a period of six weeks from today and apply for regular bail and the learned court below will take into consideration the allegation of previous enmity and decide the matter on its own merit preferably on the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33163 of 2016 (2) dt.20-08-2016 3/3 same day.

This application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajesh/- U T