Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24686/2016rejected

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Rai @ Jaibindar Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-11Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24686 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -88 Year- 2013 Thana -BOCHHA District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Rai @ Jaibindar Kumar S/o Mahendra Rai

2. Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Rai S/o Mahendra Rai Both R/o villageDharampur, P.S.- Bochahan, Dist.- Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Dr. Indiwar Kumari(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 11-08-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Bochahan P.S. Case No. 88/2013, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 366 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant father-in-law of the victim disclosed that his daughter-in-law went for treatment of her daughter, but he came to know that Mahendra Rai and his two sons and others forcibly kidnapped his daughter-in-law on a Bolero Jeep. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent. Father and sons cannot together kidnap a girl. The F.I.R. was lodged after one week of the occurrence. From perusal of the case diary, it appears that the victim

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24686 of 2016 (3) dt.11-08-2016 2/2 made very specific allegation against both the petitioners that while she had gone for treatment of her daughter both the petitioners enticed her to Delhi and after sometime they brought her to Muzaffarpur from where she came.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that the victim made very specific allegation that the petitioners kidnapped her and her minor daughter, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T