Allowed

Ram Nath Mahto v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Apr 2022CR. MISC./58483/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order grants bail to the petitioner charged with offences under Sections 363, 366A, and 34 of IPC. The court noted the victim's statement indicated voluntary accompaniment rather than kidnapping and the absence of enticement. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bonds and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing bonds of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

Ram Nath Mahto Vs the State of Bihar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58483 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2021 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Ram Nath Mahto S/O Parshu Ram Mahto R/O Village-Bhutha, P.S- Ladaniya, District-Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ramchandra Jha Raman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sucheta Yadav ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 08-04-2022

¶12

Let the defects, if any, be removed within four weeks

¶13

from today.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered in connection with Ladaniya P.S.Case No. 207 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 34 of of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, It is alleged that on 6.07.2021, the daughter of the informant went for nature call and when she did not return, the informant made search whereupon , he came to know that this petitioner has taken away his daughter for the purpose of marriage.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that just

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58483 of 2021(3) dt.08-04-2022 2/3

¶19

on the next day the girl return to her home thereafter, her statement was also recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C as contained in Annexure-2 to this petition. In her statement she categorically stated that she voluntarily went along with the petitioner and none has kidnapped her only because of the fact that while returning to her home night occurred and as such she stayed in the house of sister of the petitioner except that there is no allegation whatsoever. It is next submitted that age of the girl has been assessed as 17 years and from the impugned order, it appears that she refused to get her examination by medical board. It is next submitted that the petitioner having no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 10.07.2021.

¶20

The learned A.P.P opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that victim is minor girl.

¶21

Having heard the rival contentions of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that, there is no element of enticement on the part of the petitioner, which attract section 366A of the I.P.C. Apart from the fact the statement of the victim, in which she stated that she voluntarily went along with the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58483 of 2021(3) dt.08-04-2022 3/3

¶23

learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class Madhubani in connection with Ladaniya P.S.Case No. 207 of 2021, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:-

¶24

(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the

¶25

trial.

¶26

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

¶27

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.

¶28

(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

¶29

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶30

N.K/-

¶31

U T

Ram Nath Mahto v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Nath Mahto 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

Salim @ Md.Salim Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Tiwary @ Aman Tiwary Vs the State of Bihar

Umesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Mehta Vs the State of Bihar

Manjesh Patwari @ Manjesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar