Allowed

Anjali Kumari v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Jun 2020CR. MISC./10647/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application filed by three petitioners accused of abducting a minor, the Patna High Court granted bail, relying on the victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which did not implicate the applicants.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of like amount within six weeks.

Anjali Kumari Vs the State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10647 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2019 Thana- GAUTAMBUDHNAGAR DistrictSiwan

¶3

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

¶4

Anjali Kumari, aged about : - 18 years ( F), D/O:- Subash Sah

¶5

Ramawati Kunwar @ Ramawati Devi, aged about:-65 years (F) W/O:Ramjee Sah

¶6

Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Sah, (M) aged about :- 19 years , S/o Subash Sah All resident of village:- Bhaluara P.S:- G.B. Nagar, District :- Siwan

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 26-06-2020

¶12

Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey , learned counsel for

¶13

the petitioners and Mr. Dashrath Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State through video conferencing.

¶14

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with G.B. Nagar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 363 (A) / 34 of the I.P.C.

¶15

The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 called the victim from her home and thereafter, her brother and other co-accused abducted the daughter of the informant.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10647 of 2020(2) dt.26-06-2020 2/3

¶18

petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of the fact that petitioners are relative of the co-accused Kundan Sah, who allegedly abducted the daughter of the informant. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 3 are sister and brother of the co- accused Kundan Sah and petitioner no. 2 is relative of the said Kundan Sah. Learned counsel referring to Annexure 2 to this anticipatory bail application submits that the statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has been recorded wherein she on her own will and without any coercion has stated that the victim had gone voluntarily with Kundan Sah. Nothing has been said by the victim in her statement against these petitioners.

¶19

On the other hand, Mr. Mehta, learned counsel for State submits that the age of the victim was assessed by the learned Magistrate as 16 years and she was minor, and as such, the petitioners do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶20

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the material on record as well as the statement of victim girl recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she has not stated anything against these petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10647 of 2020(2) dt.26-06-2020 3/3

¶22

Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from today, petitioners, above named, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with G.B. Nagar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code Of Criminal Procedure.

¶23

It is made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bonds all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding lockdown and social distancing.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶25

praful/-

¶26

U T

Anjali Kumari v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjali Kumari 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

Ajay Tatwa @ Ajay kumar Tatwa Vs The State of Bihar

Jai Prakash Gope Vs the State of Bihar

Dewan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ghanshyam Patel @ Jai Ghanshyam Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Manju Devi @ Manjula Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Mishra Vs The State of Bihar