Arif Rahman @ Raja @ Md. Arif Rahman v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49545 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2296 Year-2022 Thana- SIWAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSiwan ====================================================== Arif Rahman @ Raja @ Md. Arif Rahman, S/O Irshad Sheikh R/O VillageBihpuria Ward No. 02, Ps. Bihpuria, Dist. Lakhimpur (ASSAM) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Arfin Jahan W/O Arif Rahman @ Raja, D/O Badiujama R/O VillageKoirigawan, Koiri Tola, Mahamdabad, Ps. Barharia, Dist. Siwan, At Present Mohalla- Takia, Ps. Siwan Town, Dist. Siwan ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Complaint Case No.2296 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, being husband, has been falsely implicated in the present case with general and omnibus allegation. It is also submitted that petitioner is a labourer, as such, is not in a position to maintain the opposite party no.2 as his monthly income is very

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49545 of 2023(6) dt.05-03-2024 2/2 meagre.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that from perusal of order dated 19.08.2023, it was manifest that notices were issued on the opposite party no.2 and thereafter, the notices were validly served and a learned Advocate was also engaged for representing the opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that on 16.10.2023, a learned Coordinate Bench had directed the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit stating therein that opposite party no.2 is living with the petitioner, but then, no such supplementary affidavit has been filed, which amply demonstrates that petitioner never had the intention of keeping the opposite party no.2 with honour and dignity and was only interested in getting protection from this Court in the name of amicable settlement.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned Additional P. P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T