Pradumn Ray @ Dharmendra Ray @ Praduman Ray And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30099 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -53 Year- 2015 Thana -AHIAPUR District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Pradumn Ray @ Dharmendra Ray @ Praduman Ray son of Pramod Rai

2. Rajes Kr. Ray @ Rajesh Rai son of Ramdeo Rai

3. Raj Kumar Ray @ Raj Kishore Ray son of Mohit Ray

4. Ram Pravesh Ray son of Kailash Ray

5. Indrajeet Ray @ Lakshaman Ray Son of Ugan Ray

6. Santosh Ray Son of Ramdeo Ray and

7. Narayan Ray son of Hari Nandan Ray All resident of village - Oronepur, P.S. Ahiyapur District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary 1, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-11-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant named five persons in the FIR and alleged that they all kidnapped her son to forcibly marry him with sister-in-law of Narain Ray, petitioner no. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the sister-in-law of Narain Ray, petitioner no. 7 had earlier come to the village and the victim developed intimacy with her. The victim wanted to marry with the sister-in-law of Narain Ray, petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30099 of 2016 (3) dt.16-11-2016 2/2 no. 7. Now the case is compromised and the matter is resolved between both sides, but it appears that the victim, himself, made statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and disclosed that all the petitioners forcibly kidnapped him and kept him for two days and they were pressurizing him to marry with the sister-in-law of Narain Ray, petitioner no. 7. Considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioners, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. However, the petitioners, if so advised, may surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and pray for regular bail, their prayer shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order and taking into consideration that the case is compromised.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T