Kiran Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60264 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2018 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Kiran Devi Wife of Dharnidhar Yadav R/V-Village-Awas Board, Ward No.1, Ranko,P.S- Muffasil,Distt.- Khagaria 2.
Dharnidhar Yadav Son of Yugal Kishor Yadav @ Yugal Kishore Yadav R/VVillage-Awas Board, Ward No.1, Ranko,P.S- Muffasil,Distt.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have antecedent of one case and the petitioner no.1 is a woman and the informant alleges that on 25.06.2018, his daughter, aged about 16 years had gone to attend her tuition classes with her friend Rimpi Kumari but she did not return, accordingly, the informant went to the house of Rimpi to inquire when she disclosed that the victim left with her Mousa
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60264 of 2024(2) dt.26-09-2024 2/3 (petitioner no.2) on a motorcycle from Balia Patel Chowk, accordingly, the informant went to the house of petitioners to inquire but no one disclosed anything nor Punit was present in the house.
4. The learned counsel submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being the parents of Punit. It is also submitted that the statement of the victim was recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution rather has stated that she has solemnized marriage with Punit. The learned counsel further submits that if the victim was a minor and Punit married her, in that event, offence has been committed by him but then his parents have been implicated only with a view to coerce Punit into submission.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60264 of 2024(2) dt.26-09-2024 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Balia (Baliya) P.S. Case No.179/2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T