Vibhav Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47176 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2021 Thana- SIKARHATTA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== VIBHAV KUMAR Son of Yogendra Chaudhary Resident of Village - Chakiya, P.S.- Sikarahata, Dist.- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 05-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Sikarahata P.S. Case no. 32 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has sexually exploited the informant on the pretext of marriage. It is further alleged that petitioner has performed marriage with the informant on 27.04.2018 but since 2020, petitioner stopped to make contact with her.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It appears from perusal of Annexure-2 and 3 that informant had performed marriage with Uday Prakash in the year 2016, to which she dissolve it and again performed marriage with Vikash Sharma on 08.06.2018 to which she also dissolved on 8.10.2018. Petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47176 of 2021(6) dt.05-09-2022 2/2 denied his marriage with the informant. In fact, petitioner had transferred Rs. 1,00,000/- in the account of the informant and on demand, she has implicated the petitioner with false and concocted story.

Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted that during investigation, case is found to be true against the petitioner.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Sikarahta P.S. Case no. 32 of 2021, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. VIII, Bhojpur, Arrah, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/Aman U