Raushan Kumar @ Rashan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.58380 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2018 Thana- KALER District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Raushan Kumar @ Rashan Kumar, Son of Akhilesh Rai, Resident of VillageSamhariya, P.S.- Kaler, District- Arwal. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeeb Kumar Sanju For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kaler P.S. Case No. 18 of 2018 registered for offences under sections 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
In the present case, an allegation has been made of taking away the minor daughter of the Informant. The statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. shows that she, on her own, had gone with one Abhimanyu Kumar @ Mannu Kumar as her parents wanted to marry her with another person, to save herself from the marriage, she left her house and fled away with her friend. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58380 of 2018(2) dt.28-09-2018 2/2 case, let the petitioner, namely, Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisinal Judicial Magistrate, Arwal in connection with Kaler P.S. Case No. 18 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also subject to condition that whenever the police will call the petitioner for investigation/interrogation, he will remain present and if he would not present himself, the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail shall be deemed to have been canceled.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T