Gudia Devi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28036 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4 Year- 2017 Thana -KATEYA District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================

1. Gudia Devi, Wife of Santosh Sonar.

2. Umesh Ram, Son of Jaleshwar Ram.

3. Santosh Verma @ Santosh Sonar, Son of Lalan Sonar. All are residents of Village - Fatuchhapar, P.S. Kateya, District - Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Dhramveer, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 04/2017 for the offences instituted under Sections 363 and 366(A)/34 of the IPC. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 22.10.2016 the informant and her husband went out of home for doing their work. In the meantime, her villager, namely, Diya Kumari, came her house and carried her daughter, Mintu Kumari, aged about 15 years, in impression that she was calling by her aunt Chanda Devi Thereafter, all accused persons collectively kidnapped her daughter with bad intention. The informant searched her daughter

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28036 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 but she was not traced.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. They have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no substantive evidence to suggest their implication in the present case.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. The victim has been recovered. Her statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C. has been recorded. There is specific allegation made against the petitioners and others who wanted the victim to get involved in flesh trade. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The same is rejected in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 04/2017, pending in the court of learned C.J.M. Gopalganj. If the petitioners surrender in the court below within a period of six weeks and file regular bail application , the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T