Faiyaz And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19707 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -130 Year- 2016 Thana -NAWADA District- NAWADA ====================================================== 1.Faiyaz s/o late Mashyeddin Mian, resident of D-29 B, D-Block Om Bihar Face-5, Uttam Nagar + P.S. Uttam Nagar,Western, New Delhi. Permanent resident of village- Mag Bal(Mathia), P.S. Ramnagar, District- West Champaran.

2. Sarswati Devi w/o Barjesh Barhi, permanent resident of village- Machaka Karhra, Andhrwari, P.S. Rajauli, District- Nawada, at present resident of Uttam Nagar Jhanda Chowk, P.S. Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Deo Raj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Indu Kumari Srivastav(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 366(A), 370, 372 and 373 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 9,10 and 11 of Child Marriage Protection Act, 2006.

Accusation is that on receiving secret information about performing the marriage of minor daughter with an aged person, namely, Chanchal Kumar at Lodipur Pachrukhi, P.S. Akbarpur, the informant and others reached there and the marriage was stopped. On query the victim girl informed that Moti Ram and his wife Meena Devi being the broker have arranged the marriage with Chanchal Kumar. One Faiyaz (Petitioner no.1) introduced himself as the father of Chanchal Kumar saying that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19707 of 2016 (2) dt.11-05-2016 2/2 the marriage was organized in the leadership of petitioner no.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that though the petitioners are named in the FIR, the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. did not disclose the name of the petitioners. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, let, above named petitioners, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Nawada in connection with Nawada Town P.S.Case No. 130 of 2016.

Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the petitioners, who will file an affidavit showing his relation with the petitioners and further the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during the course of the trial in the court below. If the petitioners fail to remain present on two consecutive dates during the course of the trial without any reasonable cause being shown, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.