Mannu Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30596 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -399 Year- 2013 Thana -K.HAT( Sahayak) District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. Mannu Kumar, son of Bindeshwari Mehra

2. Roshan Mehra @ Roshan Kumar, son of Bindeshwari Mehra, Both are resident of Bhoyiraj, P.S.-Puraini, District-Madhepura. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER ........................

14-01-2015 Heard Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Two petitioners, who apprehend their arrest in connection with K.Hat (Sahayak) P.S. Case no.399 of 2013 registered for the offence under Sections 363/366(A) of the Indian Penal Code, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the daughter of the informant has voluntarily fled with petitioner no.1 for solemnizing marriage, however, on the information given by father of the victim girl, the present case was instituted. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to Annexure-2 to the present petition i.e. statement of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30596 of 2014 (2) dt.14-01-2015 2/2 victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she has disclosed that she has voluntarily married with petitioner no.1. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has disclosed her age as 18 years. It has further been argued that since the victim has voluntarily married with petitioner no.1, it is a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Petitioner no.2 is own brother of petitioner no.1. In view of facts and circumstances, particularly the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Let both petitioners, namely, (1) Mannu Kumar and (2) Roshan Mehra @ Roshan Kumar be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-( ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with K.Hat ( Sahayak) P.S. Case No.399 of 2013 subject to the condition as laid down in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U