Rajesh Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.17464 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -484 Year- 2015 Thana -RUNISAIDPUR District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Rajesh Sah, son of Kailash Sah, R/o Village- Baghauni, P.s.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Madhuranand Jha (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Runnisaidpur PS case no. 484/2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 366A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
This case has been registered on the basis of complaint petition with an allegation that Anita Devi, Sarswati Devi and Kailash Paswan have kidnapped the minor grand daughter of the informant. During investigation, the statement of the victim girl was
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17464 of 2016 (3) dt.24-06-2016 2/3 recorded by the police and also under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated the name of the petitioner also regarding his involvement.
Submission is of false implication and that all the brothers of the petitioner along with his father and mother have been implicated with false allegation, the victim girl was assaulted by her family members and first of all, she was treated at Runnisaidpur on 01.10.2015 which is apparent from Annexure-2 and para 72 of case diary but this fact has been suppressed by the informant, the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has admitted that at first she came at Runnisaidpur P.S., against the petitioner there is no allegation for committing any overt act and as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration whereas learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer.
In the facts and circumstances stated above considering that against the petitioner there is no specific allegation regarding any overt act and as such, the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17464 of 2016 (3) dt.24-06-2016 3/3 petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi arising out of Runnisaidpur PS case no. 484/2015 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) rinkee/- U T