Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65550/2021dismissed

Siyachand Thakur @ Siyachandra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2022-05-26Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65550 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2021 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SIYACHAND THAKUR @ SIYACHANDRA THAKUR Son of Late Chalitra thakur @ Ram Chalitra Thakur Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.- Bairgania, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-05-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 93 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341/323/452/354(B) / 379/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant was earlier kidnapped by the accused Guddu Thakur and to get bail he got married to the informant forcibly and got her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. Now again, Guddu Thakur and the other accused persons which includes this petitioner have assaulted the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65550 of 2021(2) dt.26-05-2022 2/2 It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and he is not related Guddu Thakur and the main allegation is against Guddu Thakur.

In this kind of crime when the petitioner is accompanying Guddu Thakur to the house of the informant and has tried to outrage the modesty of the informant and threatened her and assaulted her, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. It is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner is directed to surrender with a period of eight weeks from today.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T