Sanoj Rai @ Sanoj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12405 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2015 Thana- ISUAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== SANOJ RAI @ SANOJ KUMAR YADAV S/o Munshi Ray, Resident of Village - Usari, Bihari Chak, P.S. Isuapur, Distt. - Saran at Chapra. ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Rajani Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-02-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Isuapur P.S. Case No. 66 of 2015 registered for offence punishable under sections 366 (A)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. From perusal of the record it appears that the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner was rejected by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 41517 of 2015, vide order dated 16.10.2015.

The present anticipatory bail petition has been filed by the petitioner for second time on the ground that on earlier

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12405 of 2021(3) dt.18-02-2022 2/2 occasion, his anticipatory bail petition was rejected on the ground that the victim was traceless, but now the victim has been recovered and her statement under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been recorded.

I have gone through the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which has been incorporated in paragraph 93 of the case diary. In her statement, she has supported the factum of kidnapping and she has stated that the present petitioner is one of the kidnappers.

Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U T