The High Court at Patna granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of kidnapping for marriage under Section 366A IPC, noting the victim's statement denied the allegation of kidnapping and she had refused medical examination.
The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing Rs. 10,000/- as bond with two sureties of the like amount.
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.27484 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2020 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
HARIOM KUMAR Son of Radhe Shyam Chandrabansi Resident of VillageBanjari Mahavir Asthan, P.S.- Rohtas, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajani Kant Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER
3 14-12-2020
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jharkhandi Upadhyay, the learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 16 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation is regarding the petitioner having kidnapped the daughter of the informant with the intention of marrying her.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27484 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 2/3
having a clean antecedent and he is languishing in custody since 22.01.2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted, by referring to the statement made by the victim girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate, that the victim girl has stated before the learned Magistrate that she had gone to roam about on her own volition and nobody had kidnapped her. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the victim girl has denied to get herself medically examined.
Per contra, the learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also those available in the case diary, more particularly the statement made by the victim girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate wherein she has not alleged that the petitioner had indulged in any misdeeds and she
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27484 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 3/3
had not been kidnapped, I deem it fit and proper to direct for release of the petitioner on regular bail.
Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Dehri, District-Rohtas in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 16 of 2020.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
Ajay/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in a kidnapping case for marriage.
HARIOM KUMAR
The State of Bihar
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
