Ragdu Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49110 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2282 Year-2016 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ragdu Prasad S/O Mural Mahato R/O Village- Manikpur, P.S- Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajkali Devi W/O Late Ramayan Thakur R/O Village- Manikpur, P.SHarsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Suman Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 364 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, this petitioner came at the house of complainant and took away the minor son of complainant for getting a job in Mysore. After lapse of time when the son of complainant neither returned nor contacted the complainant, then complainant inquired from the parents of petitioner about her son, but in spite of repeated query the accused persons has not given any trace of the son of complainant. The complainant suspects that the accused person has either disappeared his son

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49110 of 2023(2) dt.23-08-2023 2/2 or sold him.

4. It is submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner has been made accused in this case merely on suspicion. The complaint has been lodged after delay of four months without any plausible explanation. As a matter of fact, son of the complainant had a quarrel in his house with the complainant and his family members and out of rage, he might have left his house and taking advantage of the situation, this petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sadar Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Complaint Case No. 2282 of 2016 corresponding to Trial No. 2238 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T