Santosh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28238 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2016 Thana -BABUBARHI District- MADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Santosh Kumar Yadav, Son of Vishndeo Yadav, Resident of VillageBherihar Tole, P.S. Jainagar, District Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Soban Asghar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Atul Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 86/2016.

Allegation against the petitioner is of having abducted the daughter-in-law of the informant. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the victim was aged about 25 years. From the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it appears that she had gone of her own sweet will and the petitioner has done nothing wrong with the victim.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28238 of 2018 (2) dt.17-05-2018 2/2 Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor also. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Madhubani in connection with Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 86/2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition that one of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioner and another having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court below and the petitioner will co-operate in disposal of the trial and will make himself available before the court and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without any appropriate reason will be liable for cancellation of his bail bond. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J.) Rakhi U T