Veena Devi @ Mina Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25080 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-547 Year-2018 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

VEENA DEVI @ MINA DEVI W/o Dinesh Ram Resident of VillageMusalmanichak, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. 2.

Dinesh Ram S/o Madan Ram Resident of Village- Musalmanichak, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Shekhar Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 10-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in Minapur P.S.Case No.547 of 2018 registered for the offence under Sections 363, 365 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation as per the F.I.R. being that the minor daughter of the informant had been taken away by one Sohan Kumar. It transpires that the petitioners who were the sister-inlaw and brother-in-law of said Sohan Kumar have also assisted him.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that there was love affair between Sohan Kumar and the daughter of the informant. So far as these petitioners are

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25080 of 2019(3) dt.10-07-2019 2/2 concerned, they have been falsely implicated in this case because of their relationship with Sohan Kumar inspite of the fact that they had no role whatsoever to play in the occurrence. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code which has been mentioned by the Sessions Judge in his order wherein she has categorically stated that the petitioners along with others were present when the aforesaid Sohan Kumar forcibly solemnised marriage and established physical relation with her, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

The application for bail of the petitioners stand rejected. The petitioners are directed to surrender within six weeks.

However, in view of the fact that petitioner no.1 happens to be lady, the court below will decide the application for bail expeditiously, if she surrenders within the time fixed above.

(Partha Sarthy, J) aks/- U