Madhurendra Kumar @ Madhurendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68519 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2022 Thana- PARSAUNI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== MADHURENDRA KUMAR @ MADHURENDRA YADAV Son of Surendra Yadav R/V- Hanuman Nagar, PS- persouni, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Umeshanand Pandit Mr.Hans Lal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 363, 366A of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, the victim girl went to coaching institute of petitioner, but did not return till 2 pm and during search, the informant came to know from a villager that this petitioner alongwith his brother, mother and one unknown person have taken away the victim girl on Scorpio. Subsequently, the victim girl was recovered and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petitioner runs a coaching institute and has got no concern with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68519 of 2022(3) dt.05-07-2023 2/2 the alleged occurrence. He next submits that the date of occurrence is 08.05.2022, but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 11.05.2022 and there is no plausible explanation of delay. There is no eye-witness of the occurrence and only on suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in this case. However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the bail petition and submitted that the victim girl, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has specifically named this petitioner, as one of the person, who kidnapped her. The learned Court below has also assessed her age as 17 years. Considering the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T