Abinash Kumar Ranjan @ Avinash Kumar Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5204 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2020 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj ====================================================== ABINASH KUMAR RANJAN @ AVINASH KUMAR RANJAN S/o Sanjay Ram R/o village- Muthanpur, P.S.- Tarwara, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 21-06-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No.184 of 2020 registered under Sections 363, 366A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, it is stated by the informant that his 14 years old minor daughter started for the hotel, but inspite of the informant having returned at 10 pm, she neither returned nor was to be found anywhere. It is stated that about 8-10 days ago she had told her mother that the petitioner herein had misbehaved with her. They were convinced that the petitioner has kidnapped her daughter.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5204 of 2021(3) dt.21-06-2021 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as made in the FIR are false and incorrect. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The daughter of the informant had gone with the petitioner out of her own free will. They are living together. She is in family way. The petitioner is in custody since 14.5.2020 and has no criminal antecedent. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials that has transpired in course of investigation, it transpires that the age of the daughter of the informant has been estimated between 15-16 years in medical examination. In her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. the minor daughter of the informant has made specific allegations against the petitioner of taking her away and establishing physical relations with her.

Thus in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U T