Aditya Bhagat @ Aditya Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73655 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2022 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== ADITYA BHAGAT @ ADITYA KUMAR S/O RANJEET BHAGAT Resident of village- Birpur Ward NO- 9, P.S.- Birpur, District- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP.

Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Dinesh Maharaj, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-02-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, on the date of the alleged occurrence, the informant's daughter (victim) was plucking flowers in front of house, petitioner along with other co-accused persons reached there and abducted informant's minor daughter (victim). When informant contacted Ranjeet Bhagat on his mobile phone, he told informant that they were coming along with informant's daughter. Later on he denied to bring informant's daughter and threatened informant of dire consequences in case of taking any legal action.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73655 of 2022(2) dt.03-02-2023 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty local politics. The statement of victim girl was recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has not supported the prosecution case and stated that no one has kidnapped her. She went to Nepal with the petitioner on her sweet will. It is further submitted that during investigation, the doctor found her age between 14-16 years. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the offence as well as the age of the victim girl, , I am not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Accordingly this application stands dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T