Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2683 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -89 Year- 2016 Thana -AKHODHIGOLA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Paswan, son of Satya Narayan Paswan, resident of village- Madhurampur, Near Kanya Vidyalaya, P.S. Akorhi Gola, DistrictRohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 25-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 89 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(A)(E), 70 of I.T. Act. Allegedly, the petitioner provided information and photographs of the informant's family members for uploading on Internet and Bharat Kumar Soni upload the name and identity including the photographs of informant's family on Internet. Submission is of false implication and that Bharat Kumar Soni is none else but was the son-in-law of the informant and husband of Guria Soni, Guria Soni has filed Divorce Case No. 439 of 2013 against the Bharat Kumar Soni which has been decreed and, as such, Bharat Kumar Soni was well known to the family of informant being his son-in-law, providing photographs

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2683 of 2017 (2) dt.25-01-2017 2/2 by the petitioner to Bharat Kumar Soni appears not probable and reliable because Bharat Kumar Soni was himself having all the knowledge and having several photographs of the family of the informant. In F.I.R. it is not alleged that Bharat Kumar Soni is the son-in-law of the informant and after suppressing all these facts the F.I.R. has been lodged and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The judgment of Divorce Case is Annexure-2.

The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that Bharat Kumar Soni is none else but the divorced son-in-law of the informant which is evident from Annexure-2 and, as such, the petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Dehri-on-Sone, DistrictRohtas, in connection with Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 89 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T