Ravi Shankar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18325 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2022 Thana- HATHAURI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ravi Shankar Kumar S/O Shyam Rai @ Shyam Kumar Yadav R/O VillageBerai, P.S- Hathaudi, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-04-2024 Heard Mr.Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Manoj Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hathaudi P.S.Case No.68 of 2022, FIR dated 07.03.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to FIR, on 07.03.2022 at about 6.30 AM, when the minor daughter of informant was going to attend coaching class, the accused Pandav Shrivastava and this petitioner kidnapped her. The father of this petitioner made phone call and informed that the petitioner has kidnapped his daughter and also ensured the informant to

2/4 recover her within four days.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Further submits that in fact the petitioner was in love with the victim and they have performed the marriage and now they are living happily conjugal life and has blessed a son and he has also annexed the Aadhar Card of the victim which suggests that the date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2004 and on the date of occurrence, the victim was major.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on other other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has performed the marriage with the victim, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten

3/4 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Muzaffarpur (East) in connection with Hathaudi P.S.Case No.68 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- (I) One of the bailors should be the victim, namely, Aafiya Praveen.

(II) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(IV) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall

4/4 take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T