Pradeep Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69097 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2019 Thana- BELHAR District- Banka ====================================================== PRADEEP TANTI Son of Baijnath Tanti Resident of Village - Duhwa, P.S.- Belhar, Distt.- Banka.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 11-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in this case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Belhar P.S. Case No. 210 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In spite of indulgence granted twice to the petitioner, he has not shown to this Court as to what steps have been taken by him to get his son and the victim girl appeared in the court below. From the allegation made in the FIR it appears that as per prosecution version, the informant had gone to market on 08.07.2019 for purchasing some household articles, when she returned home did not find her daughter and in course of search she came to know that her neighbour Sanu Kumar Tanti had enticed her minor daughter and had taken her away with intention to marry. It is alleged that the informant went to the house of said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69097 of 2019(4) dt.11-12-2019 2/2 Sonu Kumar Tanti and inquired about him from his mother and father, they started abusing and were aggressive to assault the informant.

Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the victim girl has yet not appeared and if the petitioner, who is father of the boy, has been granted anticipatory bail, there is every possibility that the boy who is absconding with the victim girl would not appear. It is further submitted that the case is still under investigation and custodial interrogation of this petitioner, who is in know how of material facts with regard to the present place of stay of his son and other matters, would be necessary. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the victim girl has not been produced so far and the petitioner having taken time twice from this Court giving an impression that he would take efforts to get his son and the victim girl appeared in the court below, has not come out with his promise and assurance, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The application is dismissed.

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