Ajeet Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56673 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -146 Year- 2017 Thana -GHOSI District- JEHANABAD ======================================================

1. Ajeet Yadav.

2. Rakesh Yadav alias Baua Yadav alias Baua.

Both sons of Naresh Yadav.

3. Naresh Yadav, son of Late Chandradeo Yadav. All residents of village-Chunukpur, Police Station-Ghosi, DistrictJehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ------------- 08-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No.146 of 2017 registered under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that the daughter of the informant, aged about 15-16 years, had gone to Bandhuganj Bazar from the house to purchase the households articles but she did not return. In course of her search, the informant came to know that his daughter has been kidnapped by Rajiv Kumar with the help of his father Naresh Yadav (petitioner no.3) and brothers Ajeet Yadav and Rakesh Yadav alias Baua Yadav (petitioner nos.1 and 2).

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56673 of 2017 (2) dt.08-12-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to love affair in between the daughter of the informant and Rajiv Kumar, the son of the petitioner no.3 and brother of the petitioner nos.1 and 2, the daughter of the informant left the house to perform the marriage with Rajeev Kumar, which has been disclosed by the daughter of the informant in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure on 28.06.2017. Moreover, at the time of recording her statement under Section 164 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure on 28.06.2017, the age of the daughter of the informant has been assessed 20 years.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender by them within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No.146 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T