Vijay Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38595 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2019 Thana- BUXAR MUFFSIL District- Buxar ====================================================== 1.

VIJAY PASWAN Son of Late Bhaya Ram Paswan Resident of Village - Khurd Puraini, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar.

2.

Parmawati Devi @ Pramawati Devi Wife of Vijay Paswan Resident of Village - Khurd Puraini, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar. 3.

Mantosh Kumar @ Ghuran Paswan Son of Vijay Paswan Resident of Village - Khurd Puraini, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar.

4.

Raja Paswan Son of Vijay Paswan Resident of Village - Khurd Puraini, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar.

5.

Anju Devi Wife of Mantu Paswan Resident of Village - Kajariya, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar.

6.

Mantu Paswan Son of Late Brij Bihari Paswan Resident of Village - Kajariya, P.S.- Rajpur, Dist.- Buxar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-09-2019 Petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 115 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case is of kidnapping of minor daughter of the informant by his nephew Vinay Kumar Paswan and petitioner No.1 is father, petitioner No.2 is mother, petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are brothers and petitioner No.5 is sister of the said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38595 of 2019(3) dt.03-09-2019 2/2 Vinay Kumar Paswan and they are named in the FIR. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is delay of two months in lodging the FIR and no specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioners. Heard learned APP, who opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners on the ground that the girl is minor and she is still traceless.

In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner No.1 and the provisional bail granted to him by order dated 12.7.2019 is recalled. He is directed to surrender and pray for regular bail.

So far petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 are concerned, the provisional bail granted to them by order dated 12.7.2019 is confirmed.

This application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T