Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45909 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -351 Year- 2014 Thana -BARACHATTI District- GAYA ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar son of Sri Prayag Yadav resident of village Jhanjhi P.S. Barachatti District Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.M.P.Sinha(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No.351 of 2014 for the offences instituted under Sections 363 and 365/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 30.7.2014 in the morning at about 4 A.M., the daughter of the informant namely Archana Kumar aged about 15 years had gone to attend the call on nature and thereafter she could not returned back and after one hours the informant tried to search out his daughter but could traced out. In course of search he learnt that co-accused Jitendra Kumar and Ajay Kumar enticed away his daughter with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45909 of 2015 (3) dt.01-02-2016 2/2 bad intention.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. He has been made accused in the present case due to mistake of fact. Though the victim in her 164 statement has made allegation of establishing physical relationship with the petitioner, but subsequently, from perusal of Annexure-3, it would appear that a joint petition on behalf of the victim and her father has been made in the court below where the allegations levelled against the petitioner has been denied.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., but the victim girl has named this petitioner under 164 Cr.P.C. statement.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Same is rejected. If the petitioner surrenders in the court below, same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sudhir Singh, J) N.H./- U T