Ram Prewesh Yadav vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2357 Patna

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17339 of 2021
     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2020 Thana- MARAUNA District- Supaul
======================================================

Ram Prawesh Yadav, age-25 years (male), son of Chandeswar Yadav, Resident of Village- Harari Total Zingwa, Ward No. 11, P.S.-Marauna, District-Supaul

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha, Advocate For the State : Ms. Indu Kumari Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 10-06-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The matter has been heard out of turn on the basis

of motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioner

yesterday, which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Nafisuzzoha, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Ms. Indu Kumari Shrivastava, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Marauna PS Case No. 152 of 2020 dated 19.10.2020, instituted

under Sections 323/341/354B/379/504/506/34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

5. The allegation against the petitioner is that he Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 17339 of 2021 dt.10-06-2021

entered into the house of the informant and had disrobed her and

had threatened her to do what he says and when the informant

raised cry then others are said to have come there and chased the

petitioner to his house but his parents abused them and

threatened them not to be witness and further that the petitioner

had snatched silver chain worth Rs. 4,500/- from the neck of the

informant.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

story itself is palpably false and unbelievable. It was submitted

that at 1:00 O' clock at night the door being pushed open and

without there being any noise or breaking of any latch, cannot

be said to be true and further that the informant would wait for

her sari and petticoat to be removed and then only pushing the

culprit is also not believable. It was submitted that the most

unbelievable part is that the petitioner is said to have been

present at the spot till the time the informant called other

persons of the locality and when they came, they had chased

him to his house and there it is stated that the parents of the

petitioner also threatened them. It was submitted that all the

narration in the FIR clearly it is unbelievable and false. It was

submitted that there is history of past litigation between the

parties. It was submitted that the petitioner has also filed a Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 17339 of 2021 dt.10-06-2021

complaint case against the informant and her family members. It

was submitted that the police had connived in lodging of the

FIR as the incident is said to have occurred on 15.10.2020, but

the FIR was lodged on 19.10.2020, the reason being that on the

same day, the informant and her family members had abused

and assaulted the grandmother of the petitioner and they were

contemplating to loge FIR, but in connivance of the local SHO

this present case has been filed. It was submitted that such

statement has been made on oath by two witnesses, namely

Shivji Yadav and Sukhdeo Yadav have sworn affidavit before

the Court on 22.12.2020, stating that the police never took their

statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'), which has been

falsely recorded in paragraphs no. 17 and 18 of the case diary,

as has been noted in the order dated 04.01.2021 of the

Additional District and Sessions Judge, 4th, Supaul in ABP No.

1025 of 2020 by which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

petitioner has been rejected. Learned counsel submitted that in

the said affidavit they have also stated with regard to the fact

that on 15.10.2020, the grandmother of the petitioner was

assaulted by the informant side and to save their skin, the

present false case has been lodged. Learned counsel submitted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 17339 of 2021 dt.10-06-2021

that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

7. Learned APP submitted that there is allegation of

attempt to outrage the modesty of the informant by the

petitioner.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in

the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within

six weeks from today, the petitioner be released on bail upon

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand)

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

the learned ACJM-VI, Supaul in Marauna PS Case No. 152 of

2020, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of

the Code and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close

relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors

shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good

behaviour of the petitioner, and (iii) that the petitioner shall co-

operate with the Court/police/prosecution. Any violation of the

terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or non-

cooperation would lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 17339 of 2021 dt.10-06-2021

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

10. The application stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T