Allowed

Babu Prasad Lal Dev @ Bare Lal Dev @ Babu Prasad Lal Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC12 Oct 2015CR. MISC./25853/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a case involving kidnapping and abduction of a minor for marriage. Considering the chargesheet was submitted, no injury was found on the victim, and no chance of tampering with evidence, the court directed release on execution of bail bond with conditions. The bench were HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA. The prime cases cited were

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions regarding sureties and attendance in court.

Babu Prasad Lal Dev @ Bare Lal Dev @ Babu Prasad Lal Devi Vs… — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25853 of 2015 (3) dt.12-10-2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.25853 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -384 Year- 2014 Thana -BAHADURPUR District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== 1. Babu Prasad Lal Dev @ Bare Lal Dev @ Babu Prasad Lal Devi S/o Late Pulkit Lal Dev @ Late Purkit Lal Devi resident of Village-Mahpara, P.s.Bahadurpur (Sonki O.P.), District-Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 3 12-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State. Petitioner seeks bail in connection with O.P. Sonki P.S. Case No. 384 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly Seeta Kumari, a minor daughter of the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner with an intention to marry with her and the victim, after recovery has stated that the petitioner being a saint, gave Prasad to her and when she ate it she become unconscious and when she regained consciousness, she found her in the house of the petitioner and when she requested to send her back to her father petitioner assaulted her with rod and

¶3

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25853 of 2015 (3) dt.12-10-2015

¶4

caused threats, however, she informed to her teacher through phone and then her father brought her.

¶5

Submission is of false implication and that the occurrence is said to have taken place on 25.6.2014 whereas, F.I.R. has been registered on 19.11.2014 after much delay. The victim has not stated regarding sexual assault or that she was forced to marry with the petitioner, no injury has been found on her person and the petitioner is suffering in custody since 20.11.2014. Chargesheet has already been submitted under Sections 363 and 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration and there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence.

¶6

The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail. He fairly submits that no injury has been found on the person of the victim and she was found aged about 15 years.

¶7

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence and, as such, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga arising out of O.P. Sonki

¶8

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25853 of 2015 (3) dt.12-10-2015

¶9

P.S. Case No. 384 of 2014 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

¶10

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J)

¶11

sushma/-

¶12

Babu Prasad Lal Dev @ Bare Lal Dev @ Babu Prasad Lal Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Prasad Lal Dev @ Bare Lal Dev @ Babu Prasad Lal Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Shukla @ Munna Shukla Vs The State Of Bihar

Bintu Kumar Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar

Rakesh @ Natu Sah @ Rakesh Sah @ Natu Vs The State Of Bihar

Bibha Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Anikul Vs The State Of Bihar

Ranjeet Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar