Rohit Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6233 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2019 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== ROHIT MANDAL SON OF RAMDEO MANDAL Resident of Village - Hingauli, P.S.- Sadar, Dist.- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suraj Narayan Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akbar Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2021 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sadar Police Station Case No. 123 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the wife of the informant scolded the informant's daughter on noticing an unknown mobile in her possession, due to which she left her house and did not return. It has further been alleged that on enquiry, the informant got knowledge that the said mobile was given to the daughter of the informant by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6233 of 2021(3) dt.25-06-2021 2/3 the petitioner. It has further been alleged that co-accused persons, namely, Laxman Verma and Sunny, used to talk with the daughter of the informant and send messages on her mobile. Accordingly, the informant raised suspicion against the petitioner and other accused persons that they have abducted the minor daughter of the informant.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case without any merit However, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Court below, vide order, dated 01.10.2020, passed in B. P. No. 461 of 2020, while rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner, had given liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. He further submits that charge has been framed on 02.01.2021 against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain this application, at this stage.

As such, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned Court below itself in pursuance of the order, dated 01.10.2020, passed in B. P. No. 461 of 2020.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6233 of 2021(3) dt.25-06-2021 3/3 Permission is granted.

This application is dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty aforesaid.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √