Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57112/2024rejected

Lalmun Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-17Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57112 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-556 Year-2023 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

LALMUN RAM Son of Late Rajdeo Ram R/V- VILLAGE- GULAB KHAN BRITI TOLA, P.S.- MADHUBANK , DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 2.

ROHIT KUMAR SON OF LATE RAJDEO RAM R/V- VILLAGEGULAB KHAN BRITI TOLA, P.S.- MADHUBANK , DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajendra Sah Raktu Sah R/V- Jogauliya Tola -Palat, P.S. - Madhuban, District- East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Learned APP for the State.

2. The instant application for anticipatory bail have been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Madhubani P.S. Case No. 556 of 2023 dated 05.11.2023 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against five named accused persons including the present

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57112 of 2024(2) dt.17-01-2025 2/2 petitioners against whom there is an allegation of kidnapping the informant's minor daughter aged about 17 years and informant's minor grand daughter aged about 16 years as they were returning from school.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that both the petitioners have clean antecedent. He submits that victim has not supported the allegation levelled against the petitioners in her statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that there is an inordinate delay of 06 days in lodging F.I.R. without having plausible explanation.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the serious nature of allegation levelled against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners are hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Sunnykr/- U