Tauhid Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63386 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2025 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Tauhid Alam S/O Late Saukat Alam R/O Village- More Ali Bujurg, P.SKutumba, Distt.- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP] For the Informant :

Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74 and 303(2) of the B.N.S..

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.06.2025 at about 1:30 PM, while the informant was doing the work of Maa Bahan Yojna, this petitioner called her to his house and when the informant went there, this petitioner abused and assaulted her and also tried to outrage her modesty. It is further alleged that the petitioner snatched gold chain from neck of informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63386 of 2025(2) dt.15-09-2025 2/2

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, petitioner is Mukhiya and due to political rivalry, this false and concocted case has been lodged. Rest of the allegations are ornamental in order to make the case grave.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he called the informant to his house and thereafter, abused her, assaulted her, tried to outrage her modesty and snatched her gold chain. Petitioner has got three criminal antecedents out of which one is similar in nature.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T