Maksudan Kumar @ Masudan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76508 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2024 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Maksudan Kumar @ Masudan Kumar S/O Sheetal Mahto R/O VillageSalkhani ,P.O.- Mukhtiarpur, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sakra P.S. Case No. 103 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he used to establish physical relation with the informant on the pretext of marriage after the death of her husband.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the informant came in contact with the petitioner through Face Book and used to talk with each other and in this process the informant had given the proposal of marriage to the petitioner but he

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76508 of 2024(2) dt.19-11-2024 2/2 refused. It is further submitted that when the petitioner stopped to talk with the informant and the marriage of the petitioner was performed with another girl, this false and frivolous case has been lodged against him. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the allegation and the fact that the victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the seriousness of the allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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