Ram Pukar Mandal And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54623 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -123 Year- 2015 Thana -AJAMNAGAR District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Ram Pukar Mandal S/o - Govind Mandal

2. Govind Mandal S/o Late Kalu Mandal

3. Shakuntala Devi W/o Govind Mandal

4. Munni Kumari @ Savitri Kumari D/o Govind Mandal

5. Mangla Mandal S/o Late Kalu Mandal

6. Balram Mandal S/o Sukhdeo Mandal

7. Nita Nand Mandal @ Nityanand Mandal S/o Sukhdeo Mandal, Petitioners no. 1 to 5 are residents of Barhat, P.S. - Azamnagar, Distt - Katihar, Petitioners no - 6 and 7 are R/o Dhachna, P.S. - Barsoi, Distt - Katihar.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Azamnagar P.S. Case No. 123 of 2015 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Katihar for the offences instituted under Sections 366A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the daughter of the informant, namely, Priya Adhikari, who is 17 years old, has been forcibly abducted by the petitioners on 19.06.2015 from the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54623 of 2015 (3) dt.11-03-2016 2/2 mango orchard near by the house of the informant for the purpose of ill motive.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. The alleged date of occurrence is 19.06.2015. First Information Report was instituted on 21.06.2015. Delay has not been explained by the prosecution. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case, which is evident from Annexure-2.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the First Information Report and they have abducted the victim forcibly.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the above named petitioners on anticipatory bail, the same is rejected.

Anyhow, if the petitioners surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks and file an application of bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order and if possible the same may be disposed of on the same day.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Vats/- U T