Bail petition dismissed regarding petitioner accused of child abduction under IPC. Court refused bail due to victim's age despite custody duration noted.
Bail petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58381 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2019 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia
======================================================
JITENDRA YADAV @ CHHOTU YADAV @ NIRMAL KUMAR YADAV Son of Late - Rajendra Yadav Resident of village- Bela Rikabganj, P.S.K.Nagar, District- Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
4 20-11-2019
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 88 of 2019 dated 26.03.2019 instituted for the offences under Sections 363, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
A 14 year old girl was abducted from near the school. This information was provided to the informant by another daughter of the informant who was accompanying the abducted girl. After about some days of the occurrence, the victim girl was recovered and in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has named the petitioner as having taken to her to Purnea.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the recovery of girl is from a public place and therefore
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58381 of 2019(4) dt.20-11-2019 2/2
the statement made by the victim girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is not correct.
Assuming but not admitting that there is some divergence in the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 and the narration given to the informant by her sister after having come back home, it would not make the prosecution case entirely doubtful.
Regard being had to the fact that the victim girl at the relevant time was only 14 years of age whereas the petitioner is a major, I am not inclined to grant bail to him for the present notwithstanding his period of custody from March, 2019.
The petition is dismissed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
krishna/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of abduction of a 14-year-old girl.
Whether divergence in the victim's statements renders the prosecution case doubtful.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
JITENDRA YADAV
The State of Bihar
ASHUTOSH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
