Ravindra Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9929 of 2017 (3) dt.03-04-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9929 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -450 Year- 2014 Thana -MOTIHARI MUFASIL DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Ravindra Sahani, S/o Nagina Sahani, resident of Village- Bhataha, P.S.- Motihari Muffasil, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner seeks bail in Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No. 450/2014, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that his minor daughter went to ease out in the evening, but Ravindra Sahani (petitioner) and his father, mother kidnapped his daughter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was love affair between the petitioner and the victim. The victim made her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she disclosed that she went alone and Ravindra Sahani took her on motorcycle. It is further submitted that the victim went along with the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9929 of 2017 (3) dt.03-04-2017 petitioner to Bangalore. She was a consenting party, but Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that the victim was minor, as she disclosed her age 15 years in her statement under Section 164 of Cr. P.C.

It appears that the informant of course, alleged that the petitioner and his parents took the victim, but the informant does not appear to be the eye-witness of the occurrence. From the statement of the victim it appears that she was a consenting party. Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate - 7, Motihari in connection with Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No. 450/2014.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T