Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4652/2016dismissed

Md. Jakir v. The State Of Bihar

2016-04-26Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4652 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2015 Thana -MAHILA PS District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Md. Jakir Son of Md. Najir resident of village- Lagwa, P.S.- Son Kola, P.S.- Abadpur, District- Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 1, Advocate Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Indu Kumari Srivastava (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 45 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 506/34 of the Indian Panel Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 /4 of the D.P. Act.

Case diary was called for which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a driver of Auto Rickshaw and has been plying auto rickshaw from Abadpur to Barsoi in the district of Katihar. It has been submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the present

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4652 of 2016 (3) dt.26-04-2016 2/2 case as he has nothing to do with the occurrence. He has also submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case as the father of the victim girl wanted to marry his daughter with the present petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, after perusal of the case diary, submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having participated in taking away the girl and the girl is admittedly a minor. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Anjana Mishra, J) ajaypd./- U T