Nagendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51559 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2021 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Nagendra Ram Son Of Shyamnarayan Ram Resident Of Village - Singhpur, P.S.- Navinagar, District - Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Mukul Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Navinagar (Badem) P. S. Case No.79 of 2021, instituted for the offences under Sections 366, 323, 504, 506/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.07.2021, he is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that the occurrence is of 17.03.2021 and F.I.R. came to be instituted on 11.04.2021 and the delay has not been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51559 of 2021(2) dt.07-02-2022 2/3 explained.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant in the F.I.R. alleges that on 17.03.2021 at about 5.00 A.M., informant's daughter aged about 18 years went outside the house to attend the call of nature, but she did not return to her house. Accordingly, search was conducted, but no trace of the victim was found. It is next alleged that later on, the informant came to know that Jitendra Kumar Ram had kidnapped his daughter with intention to marry and the said Jitendra Kumar Ram was assisted by his brother-in-law along with other family members in kidnapping the daughter of the informant.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the daughter of the informant was in love with Jitendra Kumar Ram and the fact was known to the informant and as such, he did not institute the F.I.R. on 17.03.2021. It is further submitted that Jitendra Kumar Ram and the victim girl got married and marriage was before a Notary Public, Aurangabad, but when the victim returned home after marriage, she under the influence of her parents stated that she was forcibly kidnapped in her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The learned counsel further submits that co-accused Jitendra Kumar @

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51559 of 2021(2) dt.07-02-2022 3/3 Jitendra Kumar Ram has been granted bail by order dated 04.01.2022 in Cr. Misc. No.44818 of 2021.

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail application.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody, he is a person with clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and co-accused has been granted bail, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-1, Aurangabad in connection with Navinagar (Badem) P. S. Case No.79 of 2021. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T