Vikky Kumar @ Chhotoo v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28842 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -18 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA PS District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Vikky Kumar @ Chhotoo son of Chandradeo Singh, resident of VillageWashilpur, Bala Bigha, P.S.+District-Arwal .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh-1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ramchandra Sahani ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Arwal Mahila P.S. Case No.18 of 2017 registered for the offences under Sections 376, 120 (B), 506, 509 of I.P.C. and Section 66 C and 66 D of Information Technology Act.

Accusation is that the informant, Prabha Kumari, also being a friend of Soni Kumari sister of the petitioner Vikky Kumar @ Chhotoo, used to visit the house of Soni Kumari. In that course the informant reached the house of Soni Kumari then she saw that Sony Kumari along with the petitioner Vikky Kumar was present in a room from before and the informant also sat there. Thereafter Soni Kumari moved from there closing the door. Thereafter the petitioner forcibly established physical relation with the informant

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28842 of 2018 (2) dt.09-05-2018 2/2 and took her nude photograph. Thereafter the informant left to visit the house of the Sosni Kumari who is sister of the petitioner. Then the petitioner started to threaten her by sending naked photograph and message on mobile to the informant in order to lowering down her prestige in society.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and nature of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today and pray for regular bail which the learned court below shall consider and pass a reasoned order on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) AnilKrSinha/- U