Saroj Sahani And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.32908 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -46 Year- 2016 Thana -AADAPUR DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Saroj Sahani
2. Shatrudhan @ Shatrudhan Sahani
3. Santosh Sahani All sons of Jawahir Sahani residents of Village- Gonahi, P.S.- Patahi, District- East Champaran. .. .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Panchanand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Adapur Police Station Case No. 46 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366/376(G)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Diary in this case was called for earlier, which has, since been received.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is delay in lodging of the First Information Report by the victim lady and, therefore, it is a good case in which the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail. He further submits that not a single person reported her absence either by means of sanha or by filing any case for over a month about her disappearance.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32908 of 2016 (3) dt.12-01-2017 P2/2 Learned counsel for the State, however, after perusal of the case diary and also after referring to the statements made by the co-villagers has stated that the petitioner is clearly named in the First Information Report and certain irregular acts are being committed by the petitioner which warrant and go to show that the petitioners were indeed involved in the occurrence. In view of such facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to these petitioners. It is accordingly rejected.
(Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U T