Patna High CourtCR. MISC./82706/2023dismissed

Amit Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-07Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82706 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2023 Thana- MAINATAND District- West Champaran ====================================================== AMIT PASWAN SON OF Ramji Paswan @ Lalkishore Paswan RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - SINGHPUR HARAIYA, P.S- RAXUL, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 74 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 363, 366(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. and under Section 8 of the POCSO Act lodged on 12.05.2023 by the informant, Guljar Miyan.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his sister was regularly harassed by the accused person, the petitioner herein. This was repeatedly reported by her and later the informant also went to the house of the petitioner and complained about his attitude. On the eve of Eid, they found disappearance of their sister, search was made and later came to knowledge that she has been taken by the accused, petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82706 of 2023(3) dt.07-03-2024 2/2 herein for the purpose of marriage. Accordingly, the FIR

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only due to village politics he has been implicated, there is delay in lodging of the FIR and there is no legal evidence to support the prosecution story.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer and submits that as per the FIR, the girl is minor, she was earlier harassed and later taken away by the petitioner and in that background, the petitioner who is the main accused cannot be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Having gone through the facts of the case as also the submissions of the parties, this Court finds force in the submission of learned APP. Hence, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T