Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56600 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2021 Thana- AMAS District- Gaya ====================================================== Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Chaudhary Son Of Badri Chaudhary Resident Of Village - Kathak Bigha, P.S. - Amas, Distt. - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 15-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Amas P.S. Case No. 324 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354(A), 354(B), 448 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sherghati at Gaya.

3. As per the prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he sexually assaulted the victim and on previous occasion also he passed indecent remarks on the victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56600 of 2023(2) dt.15-09-2023 2/2 specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the informant is a major girl, aged about 21 years and the petitioner is also of the same age group and there was affair between them and on fitful day the parents of the informant have seen the petitioner and the informant talking with each other and then on social pressure the informant has registered the instant case, with a view to save her skin in the society. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., in which she has supported the prosecution case. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the statement of the victim u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T