Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47582/2014rejected

Prashant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2015-04-23Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47582 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -84 Year- 2014 Thana -CHAUTHAM District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Prashant Kumar, son of Satyanarayan Singh, resident of village/MohallaAourlaha, P.S.- Barhara Kothi (Raghubansnagar), Distt.- Purnia. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. S.R.P. Sinha, Senior Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Renuka Ratnakar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ------------------- 23-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No.84 of 2014 registered under Sections 366(A), 365 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria. The accusation against the petitioner and two others, named in the F.I.R., is of enticing away Jhuna Kumari, the minor sister of the informant, Santosh Kumar, with an intend to perform the marriage.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the cousin brother of the victim and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47582 of 2014 (2) dt.23-04-2015 2/2 has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute. It appears from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Annexure- '2' to this application) that she has supported the factum of kidnapping and committing rape upon her against the petitioner and two others, named in the F.I.R.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T