Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46713/2016rejected

Ashok Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-16Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46713 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -439 Year- 2015 Thana -BARAUNI District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Ashok Singh S/o Bhaso Singh

2. Raushan Singh S/o Arun Singh Both are resident of VillageMadhurapur, P.S.- Teghra, District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Anant Kumar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-01-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Barauni (Garhara) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Section 387 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he got job in the Indian Railway and thereafter his neighbours become envious. While the informant was coming four persons intercepted him. Among four persons the informant identified Ashok Singh and Raushan Singh the petitioners. All the four persons got the informant seated in a vehicle and demanded extortion. Ashok Singh snatched Rs. 25,000/- from his pocket.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they have, in fact, committed no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46713 of 2016 (3) dt.16-01-2017 2/2 offence. The petitioners are Fufa and brother-in-law of the girl with whom the informant was married. During course of investigation, the witnesses who happens to be close relatives of the informant have stated that both the petitioners forcibly got him seated in a vehicle in order to get him marry with the girl of their relations. It is further submitted that the story of demanding extortion is false, but it appears that the petitioners not only took up money from the possession of the informant but also kidnapped him for the purpose of forcible marriage with a girl. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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