Sanjeev Ram @ Sanjiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37456 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2020 Thana- SARAI District- Vaishali ====================================================== SANJEEV RAM @ SANJIV KUMAR S/o Mangleshwar Ram R/o villageMahammdabad, Maricha Ram, house no. 82, P.S.- Sarai, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yugal Kishore For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballav Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2021 Heard both sides.

The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sarai PS Case No. 192/2020 registered under Section 341, 323, 354B, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that on 12.08.2020 when she went to attend the call of nature outside her house, Sanjeev Ram, petitioner, and Manjay Ram surrounded her and put her down on the ground. Sanjiv Ram molested her and Manjay Ram assaulted her. The petitioner is alleged to have torn clothes of the prosecutrix making her semi nude.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the occurrence took place on 12.08.2020 but the prosecutrix gave her written application on 21.08.2020 on the basis of which the present FIR was registered. There is inordinate delay of nine days. It is further submitted that wife of Manjay Ram lodged Sarai PS case No. 164/2020 u/s 354B and other Sections of the IPC against husband of the informant. The petitioner happens to be friend of Manjay ram that is why the petitioner has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37456 of 2020(2) dt.01-07-2021 2/2 implicated in this case.

The learned APP opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner has no manner of concern with Manjay Ram. The petitioner along with Manjay Ram torn the clothes of the informant and tried to outrage her modesty. There is specific allegation that petitioner molested the victim. Having considered the submissions of both sides and on perusal of records, it appears that petition is not appears to be related with Manjay Ram. There is specific allegation that petitioner put the victim on the ground and torn her clothes thereafter he molested the victim in order to outrage her modesty.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T