Patna High CourtCR. MISC./76803/2019bail rejected

Anwarul @ Dilawar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-06Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76803 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2015 Thana- BAHADURGANJ District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Anwarul @ Dilawar S/o Late Khasebul Rahman R/o village- Koyelpur Dulali, P.S.- Bahadurganj, District- Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Bihar Bih ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Diwakar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-03-2020 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in Bahadurganj PS Case No. 135 of 2015 registered under Sections 370, 372, 328, 376, 506, 34 IPC and Section 12 of the Pocso Act.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution story primafacie is highly improbable as the medical examination of the victim does not corroborate the repeated sexual assault alleged in the FIR by several persons. The prosecution has been launched on extraneous consideration to coerce the petitioner to solemnise marriage with the victim and the petitioner and informant are cousin sister and brother. It is further submitted that the prosecution has also been lodged after considerable delay as the FIR disclosed allegation dating at least one and half years prior to the date of institution. Learned APP has opposed the prayer.

The victim has supported her allegations in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. regarding rape being committed by the petitioner and forcing her to establish sexual relation with others based on monetary consideration.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76803 of 2019(3) dt.06-03-2020 2/2 Considering the rival submissions this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. This application is dismissed.

The petitioner would be at liberty to raise these grounds in the court below which shall consider the same while considering his prayer for regular bail.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T