Uday Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50383 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Uday Mahto S/O Jeeban Mahto R/O Village- Chhatona, Ps. Samastipur (MUFFASIL), Dist. Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Bhubneshwar Mahto, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-08-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

3. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 194 of 2022 dated 01.05.2022 registered for the offences u/ss 341, 323, 354B, 406, 420, 363, 366, 504, 379 and 511 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, the co-accused persons are alleged to have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage. On being asked about her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50383 of 2023(2) dt.16-08-2023 2/3 daughter, the accused persons abused and assaulted the informant and the co-accused Vibha Kumari snatched chain from her neck. They also threatened to kill her daughter if Rs. 5 lakhs was not fulfilled.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has surfaced during investigation. The victim along with the petitioner was recovered from Gujrat. Learned counsel has further stated that there is nothing on record which shows that the victim was forced to have illicit intercourse with another person. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2022.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated the name of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50383 of 2023(2) dt.16-08-2023 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 194 of 2022.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T