Ranjan Raj @ Ranjan Raj Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77617 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2019 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar ====================================================== RANJAN RAJ @ RANJAN RAJ SINGH Son of Nityanand Singh Resident of Village - Bagdandi @ Bazardih, P.S.- Dhankund, District - Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-01-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 96 of 2019 dated 01.06.2019 registered for the offence punishable u/s 366A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused person are alleged to have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77617 of 2023(2) dt.11-01-2024 2/2 bail petition. The victim in her statement recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C has stated that there is love affair between the petitioner and the victim and the victim has solemnized marriage with the petitioner of her own will and gave birth to a male child from the wedlock. The victim has stated her age as 21 years. Learned counsel further submitted that the victim was not forced to have illicit relationship with another person.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Katihar in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 96 of 2019, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T