Nitish Kumar And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.26576 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -53 Year- 2016 Thana -MARANCHI District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Mamta Devi, Wife of Sri Madhusudan Singh,
2. Smita Kumari, daughter of Sri Madhusudan Singh.
3. Gulshan Kumar, Son of Sri Madhusudan Singh.
4. Nitish Kumar @ Nitish @ Prince Kumar, Son of Sri Madhusudan Singh, All residents of Village Rampur (Dumra,), Police Station Marachi, in the district of Patna.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Vikash Kumar, Son of Ram Bharosha Singh, Resident of Village Rampur Dumra, Police Station Marachi (Pachmahala), in the district of Patna.
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.26633 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -53 Year- 2016 Thana -MARANCHI District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Nitish Kumar son of Sri Chandra Shekhar Sharma, R/o villageKeshopur, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda
2. Amrita Kumari D/o Sri Madhusudan Singh, R/o village- Rampur (Dumra), P.S.- Maranchi, District- Pata .... .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Bihar & Anr ... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.26576 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Kumar Virendra Narayan (In Cr.Misc. No.26633 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Kumar Virendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 13-07-2017 Above noted both the applications have arisen out of one occurrence and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Maranchi P.S. Case No. 53 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegedly, the two minor daughters of the informant were kidnapped by the petitioners and others with ornaments and cash. During investigation statements of both the victims were recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein they have stated that they fled away from the house and the petitioners took away them and also they took the ornaments and cash and sent back them. Submission is of false implication and that no overt act has been committed upon those victim girls, they went away at their own will, no offence as alleged is made out and as such the petitioners deserve sympathetic consideration. Learned APP opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail by submitting that two minor daughters were allured by the petitioners and they have taken away them and further they took away her ornaments and cash.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that the victims have not alleged regarding any sexual harassment, the petitioners above named of both the cases, in case of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, shall be released on bail
on execution of bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Dipak Kumar, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh in connection with Maranchi P.S. Case No. 53 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T