Patna High CourtCR. MISC./206/2022bail rejected

Md Qaiyum v. The State Of Bihar

2022-08-02Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.206 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2021 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia ====================================================== MD QAIYUM SON OF DAUD R/O VILLAGE- BARA EIDGAH PURAB TOLA, P.S.- AMOUR, DISTRICT- PURNEA.

.. ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Upendra Kumar Mr. Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-08-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, Mr. Shailendra Kumar.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 236 of 2021 registered for offence punishable under sections 354B, 376, 511 of the Indian Penal Code, sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act.

By submitting the order sheets dated 22.03.2022 and 17.05.2022, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the process under sections 82 and 83 of the Code

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.206 of 2022(2) dt.02-08-2022 2/2 of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has been issued against the present petitioner, to which the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it was issued after filing of the anticipatory bail petition. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted further that after filing of the anticipatory bail petition, non-bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner on 21.12.2021.

Since the process under sections 82 and 83 of the Code has been issued in this case against the petitioner and in view of a recent decision in the case of Prem Shankar Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Another (2021 SCC online SC 955), the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T