Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37385 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-363 Year-2022 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAUSHAN KUMAR Son of Medhu Das @ Meghu Das R/o village - Bajpatti @ Madhuban Bazar, ward no. - 5, P.S. - Bajpatti, Distt. - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner is in custody since 10.3.2023 in connection with Bajpatti P.S. Case No. 363 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 67(A) of I.T. Act lodged on 15.11.2022 by the informant Chunchun Devi.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of written application of the informant, Bajpatti P.S. Sitamarhi the aforesaid FIR has been registered under section 67(A) of I.T. Act against the petitioner.

It is alleged that the marriage of the informant's daughter namely Nisha Kumari was fixed and rituals of 'Faldan' was also performed and the 'Barat' procession was about to come for marriage.

It is further alleged that the accused petitioner took

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37385 of 2023(2) dt.07-07-2023 2/2 indecent photograph of informant's daughter Nisha Kumari with his mobile and sent the same to the bridegroom's place. This resulted into break of marriage.

The submission is that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics and the biased intention. The prosecution story is false and concocted and does not appeal to normal reasoning. Having gone through the allegation, this Court finds that the allegation in the FIR is grave. The petitioner videographed the girl and when her marriage was going to be solemnized, sent the said footage to the bridegroom family which resulted into break of the marriage.

Considering the kind of allegation that has come against him, this Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail and as such the same is accordingly rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T