Md. Numan @ Munna @ Guchchu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.39841 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -171 Year- 2015 Thana -NANPUR District- SITAMARHI ======================================================
1. Md. Numan @ Munna @ Guchchu S/o Md. Mustakim Resident of Village Medanipur P.S. Nanpur District Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Narayan Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2016 Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks bail in Nanpur P.S. case No. 171 of 2015 under Section 363, 366A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that her daughter had gone to attend the call of nature but the petitioner, Md. Numan @ Munna @ Guchchu, kidnapped the victim. Rizwan was driving the vehicle. The informant further alleged that earlier Md. Numan @ Munna @ Guchchu had kidnapped the victim for which Nanpur P.S. case No. 383 of 2014 was registered under section 363, 366 of the IPC. She made her statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C. disclosing that she was major and she voluntarily left her house and married with Md. Numan @ Munna @ Guchchu and on that ground the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in Nanpur P.S. case No. 383 of 2014 vide order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16792 of 2015 but in
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39841 of 2016 (3) dt.01-12-2016 2/2 the present case the victim made her statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C. and she disclosed her age to be 18 years. She disclosed that petitioner forcibly got her sit in the vehicle and fled away and kept her for more than six months. He also established physical relationship with her.
It is submitted that marriage has already been solemnized but on account of some family dispute the victim, who is wife of the petitioner, has made different statement in court under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C.
The learned counsel for the informant submits that victim has solemnized marriage with the petitioner. Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri at Sitamarhi in Nanpur P.S. Case No. 171 of 2015. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T