Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27816 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2020 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka ====================================================== SONU KUMAR, Son of Lakhan Das, Resident of Village- Vijaynagar, P.S. and District- Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Brij Nandad Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 366, 366(A), 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 4 of the POCSO Act.

Prosecution case in brief is that on 17.03.2020 in the evening, the daughter of the informant Sweety Kumari who was induced by the petitioner had kidnapped her with intention to marry, the daughter of the informant had gone to Bakhadda Fua there she had been kidnapped by the petitioner. It is further stated that when the enquiry was made about my daughter from maternal uncle of the petitioner, who had given assurance of her daughter being returned within two or three days. It is further stated that when her daughter did not return again enquiry was made her his uncle went berserk and started abusing and assaulting. Thereafter, the informant suspects the involvement of the FIR named persons in kidnapping her daughter with intention to marry or to defile her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27816 of 2020(3) dt.10-12-2020 2/2 Therefore, she was also threatened with dire consequences. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is in jail custody since 31.03.2020. The petitioner has no antecedent which is mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail petition.

I perused the records and case diary, Para 79 of the case diary reflects that the petitioner has one criminal history which has not mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition. Without going into the merit of this application, petitioner suppressed the criminal history, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection G.R. No. 60/2020 (corresponding Rajoun P.S. Case No. 104/2020 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Banka. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T