Akhilesh Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30256 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2017 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran ====================================================== Akhilesh Gupta, S/o Chandrika Sah, Resident of Village- Bherihari Verma Tola, P.S.- Valmikinagar, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bagaha Mahila P.S. Case No. 28 of 2017 registered for offences under sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation has been made that the victim girl was taken away by Birju @ Vijay who is the friend of brotherin-law of the accused Ajay Kushwaha. Learned counsel for the petitioner has attached photograph showing marriage between Birju @ Vijay and the victim girl and also submitted that the petitioner has no connection with the petitioner and his family members. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30256 of 2018(2) dt.17-05-2018 2/2 the case, let the petitioner, namely, Akhilesh Gupta, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, West Champaran in connection with Bagaha Mahila P.S. Case No. 28 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also subject to condition that whenever the police will call the petitioner for investigation/interrogation, he will remain present and if he would not present himself, the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail shall be deemed to have been canceled.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T