Pankaj Paswan @ Ankit Paswan @ Ankit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10442 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-568 Year-2018 Thana- AMARPUR DistrictBanka ====================================================== Pankaj Paswan @ Ankit Paswan @ Ankit Kumar Son of Subhash Paswan @ Subash Paswan Resident of Village-Chandpur, P.S.-Amarpur, DistrictBanka ... ... Petitioner/

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 21-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 363, 365 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 568 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the accusation that the petitioner took her away and kept her with his relatives and proposed marriage which she refused as she was already happily married, upon which he threatened her. It is submitted that the accusations are falsified from the informant's own deposition recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. in which she has clearly stated that she had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner who had not misbehaved with her. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10442 of 2019(2) dt.21-02-2019 2/2 petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 568 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further conditions: (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T