Md. Azmat Khan @ Md. Azmat @ Gajju v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70592 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Nawada ====================================================== Md. Azmat Khan @ Md. Azmat @ Gajju S/O Late Md. Sattar Khan R/O Mohalla Bari Dargah, Gondapur, P.S- Nawada, District- Nawada, Pin- 805110 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shabana Khatoon W/O Marhum Abbas R/O Bhadauni Sharif, P.S- Nawada, District- Nawada ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 28-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mahila (Nawada) P.S. Case No. 30 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCOS Act pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act cum 6th Additional District and Session Judge, Nawada.

Allegation against the petitioner that he has outraged the modesty of the younger sister of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70592 of 2022(2) dt.28-02-2023 2/2 implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that there is admitted land dispute between the parties. He further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., in which she had supported the prosecution case. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that the victim is minor, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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