Virendra Prakash v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4251 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2021 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== VIRENDRA PRAKASH S/o Late Shiv Narayan Mahto R/o villageBhagwanpur Chakshekhu, Ward No. 1, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, DistrictSamastipur ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Vindhya Keshri Kumar, Senior Advocate :

Mr. .

Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Special P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 07-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 03.09.2021 passed by learned A.D.J.-I, Samastipur in ABP No. 1832 of 2021 whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 176 of 2021 under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST Act was rejected. It is a case of abduction of the minor daughter of the informant by the appellant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4251 of 2021(2) dt.07-07-2022 2/2 case is not within the purview of SC/ST Act.

The application for bail is opposed by learned Special P.P. and submitted that there is specific allegation of abduction of the minor daughter of the informant by the appellant along with other accused persons and the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that there is direct allegation against the appellant and after finding the case prima-facie true against him, I do not find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant and, as such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

The application stands disposed of.

However, appellant is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U