Pratima Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17204 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -7 Year- 2017 Thana -PANDARAK District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Pratima Devi, Wife of Tarani Singh,

2. Mamta Devi @ Mamta Singh @ Mamna Baby, Wife of Raushan Singh, Both are resident of Village- Gowasa, Shekhpura, Police StationPandarak, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tej Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-04-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 07 of 2017 for the offences punishable under sections 363 and 365/34 of the I.P.C.

Allegedly, co-accused Aakash Thakur took away the minor daughter of the informant and further co-accused Aakash caused threats through mobile and when the informant went at the house of Raushan Singh then Raushan Singh, his father Tarni Singh, his mother and wife started altercating with the informant. During investigation the victim girl has been recovered and her

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17204 of 2018 (2) dt.09-04-2018 2/2 statement has been recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C wherein she has stated that the petitioners and Raushan kidnapped her after tying her mouth and Raushan was saying to sell her and then she performed marriage with Aakash. She has stated her age 15 years.

Submission is of false implication and that in the FIR there is no allegation against the petitioners for kidnapping the victim but the victim has falsely stated the names of the petitioners, the petitioners are ladies, they have got fair antecedents and as such they deserve sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners by submitting that the victim has stated the names of the petitioners regarding their hands in kidnapping. Under the circumstances, finding it not a fit case for pre-arrest bail, the prayer of the petitioners for pre-arrest bail stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Barh, Patna. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T