Amrit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61202 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2022 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== AMRIT KUMAR Son of Ashok Manjhi @ Ashok Kumar Manjhi @ Sakal Resident of Mohalla Gudari Main Road, P.S- Bhagwan Bazar, Dist- Saran At chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 27-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Saran Mahila P.S. Case No.37 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable u/s 376, 363, 321, 506, 509 of the IPC. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing rape upon the informant several times by calling her in the campus of Rajendra College. Thereafter, he threatened her to upload her naked video photographs on Facebook. It is further alleged that on 22.04.2022, he kidnapped the informant and further committed rape upon her.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61202 of 2022(7) dt.27-02-2023 2/2 has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. It is submitted that from the F.I.R. itself, it is evident that she fell in love with the petitioner and on the other hand, she contends that the petitioner committed rape upon her on several occasions after calling her in the campus of the college. It is further submitted that the said college is a public place and to conduct such an offence is highly doubtful. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is rejected.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T