Dharmendra Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10566 of 2015 (3) dt.09-07-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10566 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -254 Year- 2013 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Dharmendra Rajak Son of Munna Rajak resident of Village- Gopi Tola, Police Station Gangour, District- Khagaria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Viveka Nandsingh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradip Nr.Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Khagaria (Gangaur) P.S. Case No. 254 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The case diary of the present case has also been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation, levelled against the petitioner is of mere suspicion and he has not been named in the first information report. It is further submitted that petitioner's name has surfaced subsequently on the basis of the statement of uncle of the wife of the deceased, Babita Devi and, as such, the petitioner may not be prosecuted on the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10566 of 2015 (3) dt.09-07-2015 basis of mere suspicion.

Learned counsel for the State, after perusing the case diary, referred several paragraphs wherein it has been indicated that the petitioner was the paramour of Babita Devi, wife of the deceased. It is further submitted that the two uncles of Babita Devi have clearly stated that she alongwith the petitioner had also indulged in Mar-pit as the deceased was having illicit relation with the petitioner from before, and whenever the deceased used to prevent her, he, being physically handicapped person, was being maltreated and brutally assaulted.

Considering the materials, available in the case diary and also considering the suspicion raised against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is, accordingly, rejected.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T