Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20835/2016rejected

Ravi Shankar Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2016-07-19Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20835 of 2016 (3) dt.19-07-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20835 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -122 Year- 2014 Thana -PATAHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Ravi Shankar Singh

2. Prem Shankar Singh Both Sons of Late Nageshwar Singh

3. Sunil Singh

4. Hari Shankar Singh Both Sons of Girish Nandan Singh

5. Amit Kumar Son of Harishankar Singh All residents of village - Mahamada, P.S. Patahi, District - East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kr. Panday (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-07-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Patahi P.S. case No. 122 of 2014 under Section 380, 307, 364 and some other sections of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The informant, wife of the victim Brajesh Singh @ Prince, alleged that she solemnized love marriage with Brajesh Singh @ Prince but her father, brother and other relatives lodged Patahi P.S. case No. 128 of 2012 for her kidnapping. The victim made her statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C on the basis of which final form was submitted in Patahi P.S. case No. 128 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20835 of 2016 (3) dt.19-07-2016 2012. She further alleged that on 28.10.2014 on the eve of Chatth Puja petitioners came and forcibly took her husband. Her husband is still traceless.

It is submitted that the occurrence took place on 28.10.2014 but the complaint was filed on 13.11.2014 after two weeks of the occurrence and this fact itself shows falsity of the case but it appears that petitioners are father, brother and other relatives of the informant. The informant made specific allegation that the petitioners kidnapped her husband only because she solemnized love marriage with Brajesh Singh @ Prince. Witnesses have also supported the case of kidnapping. The victim is still traceless.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T