Ravi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15035 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-486 Year-2018 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== RAVI KUMAR Son of Uday Kumar @ Uday Yadav Resident of Village - Badrai, P.S.- Masaurhi, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar Mr. Rajesh Ranjan Mr. Atul Shankar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 14-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 04.12.2018 in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 486 of 2018 for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that his 13 year old daughter went for coaching on 30.09.2018 and has not returned. He was informed that the co-accused Rahul Kumar had taken his daughter and when informant went to the house of co-accused Rahul Kumar, his family members in spite of assurance did not return his daughter. The informant apprehends that his daughter has been kidnapped by co-accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15035 of 2019(2) dt.14-03-2019 2/3 Rahul Kumar with involvement of his family members. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that his name subsequently came on the statement of the victim girl, who has stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that co-accused Rahul Kumar was being accompanied by the petitioner, whom she did not know. He further submits that no overt act has been alleged against the petitioner and the only allegation is that he was in the company of the co-accused Rahul Kumar. Petitioner undertakes not to induce the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence at any stage whatsoever. However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the petitioner does not have a clean antecedent and two more cases, although under different offence, are pending against him.

Considering the nature of allegation and the period of custody, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Danapur, in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 486 of 2018, subject to the condition

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15035 of 2019(2) dt.14-03-2019 3/3 that one of the bailors would be a close relative of the petitioner having sufficient immovable property, who will file an affidavit stating his relationship with the petitioner. (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U T