The High Court of Patna rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail under Sections 354A and 354D of the IPC, holding that his presence during the alleged harassment was a relevant factor despite his contention that he did not approve the acts.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.31106 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -306 Year- 2016 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== 1. Satya Narayan @ Satya Narayan Prasad S/o Late Dulichandra Das Resident of village Main Road Mungeriya Chowk P.S & District Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sada Nand Roy, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.Dayal APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 2 19-08-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dayal APP for the State. The petitioner along with two others are accused of Khagaria P.S. case No. 306 of 2016, registered under Sections 354A and 354 D of the IPC. The informant, is the father of the two daughters, who, according to the allegation, was consistently teased by the son and nephew of the petitioner. There is also allegation that in his presence the two other accused persons used to pass remarks and obstruct the two girls while on way to home. According to the First Information Report, this was the regular affairs.
Contention of the petitioner is that he is only the father and uncle of the two other accused persons. It is not the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31106 of 2016 (2) dt.19-08-2016
2/2
allegation that the teasing or attempt to outrage the modesty of the two girls was done with the approval of the petitioner.
Learned APP opposed the prayer and states that there is allegation in the First Information Report itself that the two accuseds used to tease and pass remarks even in presence of the petitioner .
Considering the nature of the allegations, I am not persuaded to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer is, accordingly, rejected.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)
Shyam/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, who was present during the alleged harassment but allegedly did not encourage it, is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Whether allegations that the accused used to tease the informant's daughters in the petitioner's presence constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Satya Narayan @ Satya Narayan Prasad
The State of Bihar
Kishore Kumar Mandal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
