Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61493/2019dismissed

Subrun Khatoon @ Sanroon Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-05Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61493 of 2019 Arising Out of PS Case No.-319 Year-2018 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Subrun Khatoon @ Sanroon Khatoon, aged about 32 years (F) Wife of Nain Ansari, Resident of Village-Repura, P.S.-Minapur, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Najmul Hoda and Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocates For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Minapur PS Case No. 319 of 2018 dated 7.08.2018 instituted under Sections 365, 366, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that she along with three others persons had enticed the minor daughter of the informant and had taken her away for the purposes of flesh trade.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she is the aunt of the victim and has been falsely implicated. It was further submitted that there is no allegation of any rape committed on the victim who had also returned. It was further submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61493 of 2019 dt.05-03-2020 2/2 thus, no offence is made out under The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

5. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that the victim girl in her statement to the Court under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has stated that it was the petitioner who had enticed her and then she was made unconscious and taken away.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. The interim protection granted earlier by order dated 26.09.2019 in favour of the petitioner stands vacated. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U T