Umesh Kumar Ray @ Malik Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63660 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2021 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

UMESH KUMAR RAY @ MALIK RAY Son of Late Jaleshwar Ray Resident of Village- Kanakpur, Ahiman Patti, P.S.- Dighwara, DistrictSaran. 2.

Kalu Ray @ Dinesh Yadav @ Malik Ray Son of Late Jaleshwar Ray Resident of Village- Kanakpur, Ahiman Patti, P.S.- Dighwara, DistrictSaran. 3.

Machhu Ray @ Vinod Ray Son of Deepa Ray Resident of VillageKanakpur, Ahiman Patti, P.S.- Dighwara, District- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 02-08-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition of petitioner no.1, namely, Umesh Kumar Ray @ Malik Ray and petition of petitioner no.2, namely, Kalu Ray @ Dinesh Yadav @ Malik Ray.

Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, the petition of petitioner no.1, namely, Umesh Kumar Ray @ Malik Ray and petition of petitioner no.2, namely, Kalu Ray @ Dinesh Yadav @ Malik Ray is dismissed as withdrawn.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no.3 and learned APP for the State.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63660 of 2021(3) dt.02-08-2022 2/3 The petitioner no.3 is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 354, 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code. It is a case of abduction of the victim @ informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has not been whispered by the victim, namely, Pankaj Kumari in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., who is informant of this case. He further submits that Umesh Kumar Rai (petitioner no.1) had lodged a case bearing Dighwara P.S. Case No. 183 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366 and 341 of the IPC because his sister, namely, Nisha Kumari had been abducted by the informant's family. Petitioner no.3 has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP appearing for the State opposed the anticipatory bail.

Considering the aforesaid submissions, let the petitioner, namely, Machhu Ray @ Vinod Ray, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63660 of 2021(3) dt.02-08-2022 3/3 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM-IX, Saran at Chapra in connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 182 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

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