Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13802/2017rejected

Shashi Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-24Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.13802 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -228 Year- 2015 Thana -EKMA District- SARAN ====================================================== Shashi Singh Son of Sudish Singh, resident of village - Bhushunpura Kala, P.S. Ekma, District - Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kr Singh No.1, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-05-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Ekma P.S. Case No. 228/2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 376 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that while her daughter and daughter-in-law were returning to her house after attending the call of nature, Shashi Singh (petitioner) caught her daughter and took her down. On alarm the informant and others went there and saw that petitioner was making effort to outrage modesty of her daughter, when the informant and her son tried to save the victim, Shashi Singh (petitioner) assaulted her son with bamboo stick on his head.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13802 of 2017 (3) dt.24-05-2017 2/2 petitioner runs a Kirana Shop. Some dues are lying against the informant and that is why this false case has been lodged, but from perusal of the F.I.R. and case diary, it appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner made an abortive attempt to commit rape with the daughter of the informant. During the course of investigation, the witnesses have also reiterated the same facts.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T