Karan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32354 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2017 Thana -TEGHRA District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Karan Kumar S/o Sukhdeo Ram @ Sukhdeo Das, R/o Vill.- Goura, Amni Tola, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Teghra in the District of Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar,Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satendra Narayan Singh,A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 12-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Teghara P.S. Case No. 64 of 2017, registered for offences alleged under Section 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the F.I.R lodged by the mother of victim girl on 23.02.2017 it would appear that she had named this petitioner in the F.I.R only because according to her this petitioner was in talking terms with her daughter. The allegation was that this petitioner had allured her and had enticed her away. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court towards the statement made by the victim girl, who was recovered on the same day, Annexure-3 to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32354 of 2018 (2) dt.12-06-2018 2/3 present application is the statements made by her under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she had stated that one Pinki Kumari (sister of the petitioner) and this petitioner had allured and had taken her away at Chimney where on the advice of Hemant Sharma and Roushan Sharma she was being taken to Delhi. In her 164 Cr.P.C. statement she had stated that while she was sitting at the station and this petitioner was sleeping there the police party came and enquired from her on which she disclosed the entire occurrence, thereafter, she was taken to the police station.

Learned counsel submits that the entire allegation seems to have been concocted because it is highly improbable that while the petitioner was sleeping at the platform besides the victim girl, why the police party will take away the victim girl alone and the petitioner could not be taken away. It is submitted that the petitioner had surrendered in this case on his own on 06.01.2018 and there is no allegation that he had fled away on seeing the police party rather the statement is that he was sleeping at the platform. Learned APP for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32354 of 2018 (2) dt.12-06-2018 3/3 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is that the petitioner was also sleeping there, the involvement of the petitioner has been made on mere suspicion because he could not be arrested from there is acceptable to the Court for the purpose of regular bail at present. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Begusarai, in connection with Teghara P.S. Case No. 64 of 2017, subject to the conditions U/S 437(3) Cr.P.C.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- U T