Anar Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52383 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2022 Thana- GAMAHARIYA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Anar Devi Wife Of Sukhnandan Yadav @ Aghori Yadav Resident Of Village - Chikni Fulkaha Ward No.- 7, P.S.- Gamhariya, District - Madhepura. 2.

Lata Devi @ Premlata Devi Wife Of Ranjit Kumar Resident Of Village - Chikni Fulkaha Ward No.- 7, P.S.- Gamhariya, District - Madhepura. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amarnath Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defects within four weeks.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376, 313, 34, of the Indian Penal Code as well as U/S 4 of POCSO Act. Allegedly, the informant submitted that she had been raped and the occurrence was captured in a video through which she was threatened not to disclose about the occurrence. As a result of the occurrence she got pregnant. Thereafter, under conspiracy, Anar Devi, gave her an abortion pill to eat and thus the informant got aborted. Thereafter, she was assaulted by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52383 of 2022(2) dt.13-12-2022 2/2 Ranjit Kumar and other co-accused on her appearance to their house with her parents.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. It is further submitted that both the parties are co-villagers and due to dirty village politics they have been implicated in this case. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail application submitted that considering the seriousness of the allegation petitioners do not deserve bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners named above on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioners is rejected.

Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ishika/divyanshi U T