Gulam Jilani @ Gulam Zilani @ Md. Gulam Jilani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19445 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2018 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Gulam Jilani @ Gulam Zilani @ Md. Gulam Jilani, son of Md. Ataul @ Mohammad Ataul @ Atur Rahman, Resident of Village- Milki, P.S.- Warisnagar, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satendrta Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Warisnagar P.S. Case No.160 of 2018, for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner along with others abducted the daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case, as would be evident from Annexure-3, which is application filed by the informant before learned C.J.M. stating therein that co-accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19445 of 2019(5) dt.23-07-2019 2/3 Ishrat Praveen, due to previous enmity, has falsely implicated the petitioner in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in that application, the informant has categorically stated that the petitioner has got no involvement in the abduction of her daughter. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that girl has been recovered and in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. did not disclose the name of petitioner rather has disclosed the name of two other persons who were involved in the abduction / kidnapping of the victim. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and taking into consideration the fact that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the name of the petitioner has not been disclosed by the victim, as such, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks and in the event of surrender by him, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Court below upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19445 of 2019(5) dt.23-07-2019 3/3 Magistrate, Samastipur, subject to the condition as mentioned under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T