← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34350/2016dismissed

Araj Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-09Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34350 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -185 Year- 2015 Thana -DAUDPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Araj Singh S/o Late Sahdeo Singh, resident of Village- Tajpur Phulwaria, P.S. Manjhi, District- Saran at Chapra.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh Mr. Anil Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5.

09-11-2016 Heard Sri Dewendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Suresh Prasad Singh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of complainant/informant. The petitioner, apprehending his arrest in Daudpur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2015 registered for offence under Sections 498(A), 354, 376, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail in the event of his arrest or surrender. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on an allegation that the complainant was raped by the petitioner long back in the year 2009, whereas, F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2015 on the basis of earlier complaint filed by the complainant. He

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34350 of 2016 (5) dt.09-11-2016 2/2 further submits that some of the accused persons have already been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. However, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the informant, opposing the prayer, submit that the case of the petitioner cannot be compared with other accused persons, since against the petitioner, there is specific accusation of committing rape with the complainant.

In view of nature of accusation, I do not find any ground to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. Dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T