Aakash Yadav @ Aakash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39966 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2022 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== AAKASH YADAV @ AAKASH KUMAR Son of Kishore Yadav @ Kishor Chaudhari Resident of village - Nuruddinpur, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, District - Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vikramdeo Singh Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary For the opposite party :

Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh Mr. Abhay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 255 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, petitioner is alleged to have kidnapped the minor daughter of informant with intention to marry.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 27.05.2022 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and he has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39966 of 2022(3) dt.24-01-2023 2/2 falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. The learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation of kidnapping the minor girl and the same is supported by the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with statement of victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. as well as material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew prayer of bail after nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order to the court concerned, if there is no substantial progress in the proceeding of trial within the stipulated period. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T