Indradeo Sahani @ Inardeo Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44653 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2022 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

INDRADEO SAHANI @ INARDEO SAHANI SON OF LATE JANG BAHADUR SAHANI R/O VILLAGE- MATHIYA MADHUBANI, WARD NO. 3, P.S.- MOTIHARI MUFFSIL, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN 2.

SUMITRA DEVI WIFE OF INDRA SAHANI R/O VILLAGE- MATHIYA MADHUBANI, WARD NO. 3, P.S.- MOTIHARI MUFFSIL, DISTRICTEAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No.270 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The petitioners alongwith other co-accused persons are said to have forcibly kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44653 of 2022(2) dt.01-12-2022 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submitted that the victim girl is still traceless.

Considering the fact that the victim girl is still traceless, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Sanjay/- U T