Allowed

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 Mar 2017CR. MISC./9419/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting anticipatory bail to Manish Kumar in PS Case No. 150 of 2016 for offences u/s 366A/34 IPC. The court noted the victim's statement suggested voluntary cohabitation and marriage without evidence of force, leading to bail with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Order granted anticipatory bail for release upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Manish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9419 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -150 Year- 2016 Thana -SAUR BAZAR District- SAHARSA

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Manish Kumar, Son of Dinesh Paswan, Resident of Purwi Sahuriya tola, Sonbarsa, Police Station Suar Bazar, District- Saharsa

¶6

1. The State of Bihar =================	.... Petitioner Versus .... Opposite Party =====================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner	: Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State	: Mr. Asharaf Ansari, APP 86
For the informant =================	: Mr. Uday Chandra Prasad, Adv. =====================================
CORAM: HONOURA ORAL ORDER	BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

¶7

2 10-03-2017

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the informant and the State.

¶9

This is a petition for grant of anticipatory bail for offence under Section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

Allegation against the petitioner is of kidnapping of Priyanka Kumari, a married girl. Priyanka Kumari, in her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, has stated that she was married with one Vikas Kumar, but, was in love with the petitioner, hence, she fled away along with this petitioner and, thereafter, married with the petitioner in a temple.

¶11

The statement of the victim-girl does not reveal

¶12

that any force was used by the petitioner.

¶13

The learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid fact, the petitioner,

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9419 of 2017 (2) dt.10-03-2017

¶16

2/2

¶17

above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 150 of 2016 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa , or successor Court, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

¶18

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶19

SA/-

¶20

U √ T √

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bishwa Nath Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Home police Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna and Ors.

Ganesh Mandal Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Meena Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Hari Kishore Poddar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sada Nand Das and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Balmiki Dhadhi and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar