Allowed

Sadique Shekh @ Sadik Sheakh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC1 Apr 2016CR. MISC./4637/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to petitioners in a kidnapping case. The court noted conflicting statements from the victim girl regarding her free will in marriage and her age. Bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with sureties were ordered.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount.

Sadique Shekh @ Sadik Sheakh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Patna HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5775 of 2016 (3) dt.01-04-2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5775 of 2016

¶4

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -545 Year- 2015 Thana -DIHRINAGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== 1. Aman Ansari, Son of Murtaza Ali, Resident of Mohalla- Jakki Bigha, P.S.- Dehri (T), District- Rohtas..... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.4637 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -545 Year- 2015 Thana -DIHRINAGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== 1. Sadique Shekh @ Sadik Sheakh S/o Firoj Sheikh Resident of MohallaLalganj (Chunna Bhatta), Dehri, P.S.- Dehri (T), District- Rohtas. …………………………………………….Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Sumit Sorabh S/o Sri Vinay Kumar Dubey, Resident of Mohalla- New Area, Ward No. 24, PS- Dehri (T), District- Rohtas. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : (In Cr.Misc. No.5775 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Gulnar Begum(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.4637 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyavrat Verma(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 3 01-04-2016 Above noted both the applications have arisen out of one occurrence i.e. Dihri (Town) P.S. Case No. 545 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Allegedly, Mithu aged 14 years, the sister of the informant became traceless with two bags, clothes, ornaments,

¶5

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5775 of 2016 (3) dt.01-04-2016

¶6

ATM, cash of Rs. 6,000/- and mobiles. After inquiry it transpires that Sunni Khan and his father have got hands in kidnapping Mithu. During investigation the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., certified copy of which has been filed today on behalf of the petitioners, wherein she has denied regarding her kidnapping and has stated that she has performed marriage with Sunni Khan out of her own sweet will. She has stated her age as 19 years though the learned Magistrate has assessed her age 17 years.

¶7

Submission is of false implication and that other FIR named accused persons have been allowed pre-arrest bail and the petitioners without any fault are suffering in custody since 02.12.2015 to which learned APP fairly submits that the victim girl in her statement has not stated against the petitioners.

¶8

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioners of both the applications above named are directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Dehri, in connection with Dehri (Town) P.S. Case No. 545 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5775 of 2016 (3) dt.01-04-2016

¶10

the court concerned and the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on their part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioners from privilege of bail.

¶11

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J)

¶12

avin/-
U T

Sadique Shekh @ Sadik Sheakh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadique Shekh @ Sadik Sheakh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Case details

Similar cases

Dhuri Baitha @ Dhri Baitha and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Anmol Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Guddu Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Sikandar Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Tiwary @ Appy Tiwary@Rajesh Tiwary Vs The State Of Bihar

Pappu Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar