Munna Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.57260 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -108 Year- 2017 Thana -TEKARI District- GAYA ======================================================
1. Munna Yadav, S/o Mahendra Yadav,
2. Sangita Devi, W/o Munna Yadav,
3. Asha Devi, W/o Mahendera Yadav, All R/o Village- Makpa, P.S.- Tekari, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate. Mr. Mukul Jee, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 07-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Tekari P.S. Case No. 108 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 366 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the written report that wife of the informant along with one Rekha Devi had gone to Tekari market for purchasing some articles and she did not return. He talked on the mobile phone of his wife who informed him that Tannu Yadav had kidnapped her.
The victim girl on her recovery has given statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C. wherein she has levelled specific
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57260 of 2017 (2) dt.07-12-2017 2/2 allegation against co-accused Tannu Yadav that he had kidnapped her.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 108 of 2017, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIth, Gaya, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.
with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioners and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.
(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T