This is an oral order granting anticipatory bail to two petitioners, parents of a co-accused, in a kidnapping case. The application for the third petitioner (the co-accused) was withdrawn to enable his surrender.
Anticipatory bail granted to petitioner 1 and 2 within six weeks; application dismissed as withdrawn regarding petitioner 3.
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.77684 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2019 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER
2 28-11-2019
At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present application qua the petitioner no.3 in order to enable him to surrender and seek regular bail.
Accordingly, the present application qua the petitioner no.3 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Ara-Nawada P.S. Case No. 403 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77684 of 2019(2) dt.28-11-2019 2/3
366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation in nutshell is regarding the daughter of the informant being kidnapped by the co-accused person namely Dhananjay Rai and the petitioner no.3 herein for the purposes of solemnizing marriage and the petitioner no.1 and 2 who are father and mother of the said co-accused persons are said to have supported.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a bare perusal of the F.I.R. would show that if at all any person is having complicity in the alleged occurrence, it is either the co-accused Dhananjay Rai or the co-accused Deepak Rai however, the parents do not have any complicity in the alleged crime and they are innocent. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.1 and 2 are having a clean antecedent.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to enlarge the petitioner no.1 and 2 above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77684 of 2019(2) dt.28-11-2019 3/3
Magistrate, Ara in connection with Ara P.S. Case No. 403 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
mdrashid/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner parents should be enlarged on anticipatory bail in a kidnapping case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rameshwar Rai
Shushila Devi
Deepak Rai
The State of Bihar
Mohit Kumar Shah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
