Ravindra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50418 of 2015 (3) dt.04-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50418 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -106 Year- 2015 Thana -SUPAUL District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Ravindra Yadav son of late Bahuri Yadav @ Dhirendra Yadav, Resident of village- Kataiya, P.S.- Pipra, District- Supaul .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nisha Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar 1 (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 04-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 106 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, 12 accused persons including the petitioner kidnapped Ranjana Kumari @ Guddi Kumari the minor daughter of the informant and during investigation the victim girl was recovered and she has stated the name of the accused persons but has not named the petitioner.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has not been named by the victim and without any legal and cogent evidence he is suffering in custody since 12.07.2015 having no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50418 of 2015 (3) dt.04-01-2016 Learned APP after going through the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. vide paragraph 145 of the case diary fairly submits that the petitioner has not been named by the victim in her statement dated 08.09.2015. In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner above named 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, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 106 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a 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) avin/- U T