Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18164/2017dismissed

Md. Abaidulla @ Md. Avaidulla v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-18Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18164 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -127 Year- 2017 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ======================================================

1. Md. Abaidulla @ Md. Avaidulla Son of Md. Gulshan @ Md. Gulshan Dhuniyan Resident of Village Meghouna, P.S. Allouli, District Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-05-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Khagaria (Chitragupt Nagar) P.S.Case No.127 of 2017, G.R.No.582 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 363 & 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner and one co-accused is that they forcibly abducted the daughter of the informant in a Bolero and the further allegation is that on 'hulla', the persons assembled there and caught both the accused persons at the spot itself. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that this is a case of love affair and the victim girl in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that nothing wrong was committed with her and she has simply stated that she was forcibly taken in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18164 of 2017 (3) dt.18-05-2017 2/2 Bolero. It is further submitted that the petitioner is driver of the vehicle and he has nothing to do with the occurrence. Now he has remained in custody for more than two months. Heard learned A.P.P. also and the learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail stating that not only the informant in the F.I.R. but also the victim girl in her statement as well as the witness have also supported the prosecution case about forcibly abduction of the victim and the people assembled there caught the accused persons. Having heard both sides and in view of nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner within a period of nine months.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U