Rakesh Kumar @ Chhotu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18550 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2015 Thana -KHAGARIA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Suraj Kumar S/o Bijay Sah resident of village-Gulab Nagar, P.S.- Khagaria (Chitragupta Nagar), District- Khagaria.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.22879 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2015 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar @ Chhotu Son of Kaushal Kishore Keshri, Resident of Village Gulab Nagr, Police Station Chitragupta Nagar, District Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.22296 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2015 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Sammi Kumar @ Shammi Kumar Son of Kaushal Kishore Kesri, Resident of village- Gulab Nagar, P.S.- Chitragupta Nagar, District- Khagaria .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.18550 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anita Kumari(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.22879 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Viveka Nandsingh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar No.2 (App) (In Cr.Misc. No.22296 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Viveka Nandsingh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Asha Kumari (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-06-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18550 of 2015 (2) dt.15-06-2015 Having regard to the nature of allegation against the three petitioners for offence under section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the fact that the victim girl has not been recovered, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to any of the petitioners, who are directly said to be involved in kidnapping the girl.
That being so, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, accordingly, rejected but then nothing said in this order shall come in the way of the petitioners in surrendering and seeking regular bail.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/- U