Manawwar Alam @ Manawwar Hussain @ Md. Manawwar Alam @ Md. Manuwwar Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24646 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2018 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria ====================================================== MANAWWAR ALAM @ MANAWWAR HUSSAIN @ MD. MANAWWAR ALAM @ MD. MANUWWAR ALAM S/o Ziaul Rahman @ Jiyaurrhaman R/o village- Bardenga, P.S.- Mahalgaon (Jokihat), District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is in custody since 27.11.2018 in connection with Jokihat (Mahalgaon) P.S. Case No. 110/2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 of the I.T. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire allegation against the petitioner is false and manufactured and it is hardly probably that such an act would have been perpetuated in the house where the two brothers-in-law of the victim lady were also present and during the night time, it also highly improbable that a women who slept left the door open as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24646 of 2019(5) dt.17-10-2019 2/3 as has been alleged in the present FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the story of the alleged act having been made into a video and thereafter the accused having threatened her to make the same viral is also a figment of imagination. He thus submits that it is only on account of previous grudge that the petitioner has been implicated in connection with the present case. Case diary in the present case was called for which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the State after perusal of the case diary submits that the victim lady has supported her case in her statement made under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. and she has also produced the video which was perused by witness also. This fact stands recorded in the case diary.

He, thus, submits that there being sufficient cogent material, the petitioner is not entitled to the privilege of bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations made particularly under Section 66 of the I.T. Act, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to this petitioner.

It is accordingly rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24646 of 2019(5) dt.17-10-2019 3/3 Trial to be expedited.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U T