Ravi Ranjan @ Barbaka @ Barka Buwa v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.25179 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -63 Year- 2018 Thana -SONEPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Ravi Ranjan @ Barbaka @ Barka Buwa, Son of Ram Ayodhya Sharma Resident of Village- Saidpur (Manupur), P.S.- Dighwara, District- Saran at Chapra.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 03-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody since 9.3.2018 in connection with sonepur P.S. Case No.63 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated with the allegation of having carried the informant's daughter on his motorcycle and handed her over to one Raja Sharma, who took her to Nepal. It is submitted that in fact there is love affair between the lady and said Raja Sharma. It is therefore submitted that the ingredients of Section 365 of I.P.C. are not attracted and at the highest, it may be a case covered under Section 498 I.P.C. Petitioner is accused in one other case for different nature.
4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25179 of 2018 (2) dt.03-05-2018 2/2 the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount leach to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Sonepur P.S. case No.63 of 2018, on the following 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 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.
(iv) 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. (Vikash Jain, J) N.H./- U T