Amarjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29371 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2018 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali ====================================================== AMARJEET KUMAR S/O SURENDRA SINGH R/O VILLAGEYUSUFPUR, P.S-LALGANJ, DISTRICT-VAISHALI. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

NIRJALA KUMARI W/O AMARJEET KUMAR, D/O LATE RAJ KUMAR SAH R/O VILLAGE-YUSUFPUR, P.S-LALGANJ, DISTRICTVAISHALI. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 09-02-2022 This matter has been taken up for hearing online because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking to remove the defects as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case no. 394 of 2018 instituted for the offence punishable under Section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation in the FIR, when grand-daughter of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29371 of 2021(2) dt.09-02-2022 2/3 the informant went for call of nature and did not return, a search was made by her parents and it came to knowledge that victim girl was enticed and kidnapped by the petitioner along with his associates.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has got no criminal antecedent. In fact, grand-daughter of the informant is a major and was in love with the petitioner. She out of her own sweet will left her house for Delhi and she solemnized marriag with the petitioner in a temple and presently she is living in her matrimonial home with the petitioner.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that it is a case of abduction of the victim girl. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the bail prayer of the petitioner was rejected on 25.10.2019 by the learned lower court and after a long delay of about one and a half year, petitioner has approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail. In the statement, u/s 164 Cr.P.C. the girl has specifically named the petitioner for kidnapping her. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there is specific allegation of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29371 of 2021(2) dt.09-02-2022 3/3 kidnapping against the petitioner in the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U