Patna High CourtCR. MISC./55919/2017bail granted

Dhiraj Bhandari v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-23Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55919 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -59 Year- 2017 Thana -NANHPUR District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Dhiraj Bhandari, Son of Suresh Bhandari, R/o Village- Prem Nagar, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sir Pramod Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 59 of 2017, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in which Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code was added later on along with Sections 4/8 of the POCSO Act. Allegation against the petitioner is of kidnapping of minor daughter of the informant.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the statement of the girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., itself shows that there was no kidnapping in this case rather the victim had gone at her own sweet will along with the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55919 of 2017 (2) dt.23-11-2017 petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2017. Having heard both sides, in view of the above facts, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 59 of 2017, subject to the following conditions:

(i). One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned court.

(ii). The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

(iii). The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) KKSINHA/- U T