Golu Kumar Dubey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29282 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -140 Year- 2016 Thana -BIHIYA District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Golu Kumar Dubey Son of Ajay Kumar Dubey Resident of Village - Dubauli, P.S. - Bihiya, District - Bhojpur, Arrah. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.Dayal, For the informant : Ms. Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 31-08-2016 Heard the counsel for the petitioner, the informant as well as Mr. Dayal APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bihiya P.S. case no. 140 of 2016, registered under Sections 363, 366A and 120B/34 of the IPC.

The brother of the victim has alleged that his minor sister was kidnapped by the accused persons at night when she had gone to attend the call of nature. The following day co-accused Munna Paswan was arrested who is said to have made a confessional statement inculpating himself in the alleged offence stating further that he was having affairs with the victim girl. On disclosure made by him the victim girl was recovered on the same day from the house of his 'Mousi'. The statement of the girl was recorded by the learned Magistrate wherein she has alleged that in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29282 of 2016 (2) dt.31-08-2016 2/2 the night of 18.05.2016 when she had gone out to attend the call of nature co accuseds Anuj Pandey, Munna Paswan and the petitioner came. Anuj Pandey whipped out dagger and under threat to her life forcibly kidnapped her.

Contention of the petitioner is that owning to previous animosity, he has been named in the FIR. Co accused Munna Paswan has stated in his confessional statement that love affairs was going between him and the victim girl. The doctor on assessment estimated the victim girl between 18 to 20 years. Learned counsel for the informant as well as the State opposed the prayer and submitted that in her statement (Annexure3), the victim girl has specifically alleged that the petitioner along with others had kidnapped her. In the estimation of the Magistrate, the girl was minor.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the allegations contained in the FIR and the statement of the victim (Annexure-3) I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer is, accordingly, rejected.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U T