Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13211/2021bail rejected

Rinku Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2021-07-23Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13211 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2020 Thana- AMAS District- Gaya ====================================================== RINKU DEVI Wife of Guddu Yadav Resident of Village - Chandi Sthan, P.S.- Amas, District - Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bachan Jee Ojha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 23-07-2021 In view of sudden resurgence of COVID-19 infection there is limited functioning of the High Court and therefore the matter has been listed for consideration through virtual mode. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

This Court would expect that the petitioner's Counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office.

Petitioner seeks bail in Amas PS Case No. 144 of 2020, registered under Sections 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per prosecution case is that petitioner has allured the informant's minor daughter and handed her over to one co-accused wherefrom she has been taken to Rajsthan. She has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13211 of 2021(2) dt.23-07-2021 2/2 intimated her whereabouts through telephone leading to lodging of the case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a lady and it is a false. She is in custody since 25.07.2020.

Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and drawn the Court's attention towards the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure-2 to this application. It appears that it is a case of human trafficking in which one co-accused Rajesh is also involved. Minor victim has specifically stated that she was taken away by this petitioner.

Considering the rival submissions, for the present this Court is not inclined to allow the prayer for bail of petitioner. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) rakhi/- U T