Govind Kumar @ Govind Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71480 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2021 Thana- PIPRAHI District- Sheohar ====================================================== GOVIND KUMAR @ GOVIND KUMAR SAH Son of Rambabu Sah Resident of Village - Minapur Balaha, P.S.- Piprahi, District - Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Virendra Narayan, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 132 of 2021 registered under Sections 363, 366(A), 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2021, is a person with clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and the informant alleges that on 18.06.2021 at about 04:30 AM his daughter aged about 16 years had gone outside of the house to attend the call of nature, when it is alleged that the petitioner alongwith Ram Babu Sah and Sripati Devi kidnapped her. Accordingly, a search was made but the victim could not be located. It is further alleged that a day prior to the occurrence on 17.06.2021 the petitioner was chasing the informant's daughter

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71480 of 2021(2) dt.10-05-2022 2/2 with a view to kidnap her.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim has returned and she has not supported the case of prosecution in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has disclosed her age as 17 years, the learned counsel submits that the victim has reached the age of discretion, thus, was able to understand the consequences of her action. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2021, is a person with clean antecedent and chargesheet has been submitted in the case and the victim has not supported the case of prosecution in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., let the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 132 of 2021.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) ved/- U T