Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1120/2017dismissed

Sahim Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-16Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1120 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -146 Year- 2016 Thana -KOCHAS District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Sahim Alam son of Sahban Ahmad @ Sahban Alam, resident of Village - Shekh Bahuara, P.S. - Kochas (Parsathua) O.P., District - Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar - 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Kochas (Parsathua) P.S. case No.146 of 2016 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354A and 354B of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the court of A.C.J.M. 1st class, Sasaram, Rohtas. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence while the informant was returning from her coaching class petitioner teased her and tried to pull her by holding her arm and started to molest her and on protest he assaulted on the head and back of the informant by danda. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1120 of 2017 (2) dt.16-01-2017 tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. There is no substantive evidence to suggest his implication in the present case. The petitioner has been made accused due to village politics. Both the parties are resident of the same village. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. There is specific allegation against him for harassing the victim.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Anyhow if the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of six weeks from today, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. If possible, the same shall be disposed of preferably on the same day.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T