Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63271 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2018 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sonu Kumar Son of Vishnu Kasera, resident of Village- Cinema Hall Pupri (Jaitpur), P.S. Pupri, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Arbind Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Pupri P.S. Case No. 324 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is the father of victim girl who in his written complaint has stated that his daughter Jyoti Kumari went to attend School at 5:20 am in the morning and when she did not return to home till 12 Noon, he started searching for her and during the course of search at about 2:00 pm, he came to know that Sonu Kumar and four others had enticed away his daughter and took her towards Pupri Bazar. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there was love affair between the petitioner and the daughter of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63271 of 2018(2) dt.26-10-2018 2/2 the Informant and daughter in her statement made u/s 164 of Cr.P.C has stated that she was kept in the house of sister of petitioner and there was no complain made of sexual assault. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 25.06.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 324 of 2018, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

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

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U