Md. Rashid Sah @ Rashid Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20512 of 2016 Arising out of P.S. Case No. -511 Year- 2014 Thana -KANTI District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Md. Rashid Sah @ Rashid Sah, son of late Hemi Sah, resident of VillageHarchandra, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ram Bilash Roy, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 25.2.2016 in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 511 of 2014 for the offences instituted under Sections 420, 364 and 363 Indian Penal Code.

The Prosecution story, in brief, is that the Informant filed a written report before the Officer-in-Charge, Panapur O.P., alleging therein that he married his daughter with Md. Ajmat and she went to her in-law's house where she gave birth to a male child but her sasural people did not allow to meet him in spite of his visit to her sasural several times. The informant has expressed his doubt that the accused persons have killed his daughter and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20512 of 2016 (3) dt.20-07-2016 2/3 grand-son.

The petitioner is in custody since 25.2.2016 and the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tempering with the evidence against the petitioner. It is a case and counter case between the parties. The son of the petitioner is said to have been married to the daughter of the Informant and the said couple blessed with a male child and the Informant has alleged that he was not allowed to meet her daughter and grand-son. On the other hand, the wife of the petitioner being the informant of the counter case has alleged that she was not allowed to meet her son and this led to institution of the present two cases raising suspicion by both the parties in respect of abduction of the victims.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the son of the petitioner was forcibly being kept as 'Gharjamai' by the Informant. There is no direct or indirect evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and the Informant, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report and he has abducted the daughter of the Informant.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20512 of 2016 (3) dt.20-07-2016 3/3 the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 511 of 2014. (Sudhir Singh, J) S.Ali/- U T