Ravi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50540 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-314 Year-2020 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran ====================================================== RAVI KUMAR Son of Sri Hari Manjhi @ Hari Paswan Resident of Village - Saidpur Dighwara, P.S. - Dighwara, District - Saran (Chapra). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual court proceedings. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 314 of 2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 363 and 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2021, is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted. The informant alleges that his minor daughter was kidnapped by some criminal on 17.12.2020 and on basis of suspicion alleges that petitioner and his friends might have kidnapped her as the petitioner prior to the occurrence had teased her when she was going for tuition and when informant went to the house of the petitioner for making complain, the petitioner threatened that he will

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50540 of 2021(2) dt.01-02-2022 2/2 kidnap the victim.

Learned counsel submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case by alleging that she was a minor when in reality the victim is a major as in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has disclosed her age as 18-1⁄2 years and further the Doctors have also assessed her age in between 17 to 19 years. Learned counsel further submits that the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not even remotely supported the prosecution case rather has stated that she on her own volition fled away to Mumbai with the petitioner and they got married there. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody, is a person with clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted and the victim has not supported the prosecution case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, Chapra, Saran in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 314 of 2020.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T