Anil Yadav @ Anil Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68004 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-356 Year-2021 Thana- DAGARUA District- Purnia ====================================================== Anil Yadav @ Anil Kumar Yadav Son Of Giranand Yadav R/V- Sohta, P.SChhatapur, Dist- Supoul, At Present Resident Of Mohalla- Manjheli, Jiyagachhi, P.S- Muffasil (Ranipatra) Purnea, Dist- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mohammad Sufyan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 04-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case in nutshell is that in the night at about 2 A.M., when the informant woke up, he came to know that his daughter is missing. He made search and during the course of search, it came to notice that co-accused Chhotu Ray with the hekp of his brother

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68004 of 2022(3) dt.04-04-2023 2/3 Munna Ray and others has abducted the minor daughter of the informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and he has been arrested on mere suspicion. The victim has not whispered about the specific overt act in respect of the petitioner in commission of the alleged offence, in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has stated with regard to love affair and her marriage with coaccused Chhotu Rai and she lived with him in Nepal about three months. There is no any allegation of physical abuse to victim by the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.08.2022. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for Bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68004 of 2022(3) dt.04-04-2023 3/3 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Dagarua P.S. Case No. 356 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnea.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) nirajkrs/- U T