Patna HC allowed bail application rejected by this court. Petitioner sought bail in abduction/marriage case, claiming victim consent; court rejected bail due to offence gravity and victim statement.
Prayer for regular bail is rejected.
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.58733 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2021 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
VIKASH KUMAR @ VIKASH KUMAR DAS Son of Ghanshyam Das Resident of Village - Ramana, Panchayat - Bangaon, P.S. - Basnahi, District - Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajnish Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 28-03-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, this petitioner along with other FIR named accused persons abducted the sister of informant on the threat of weapon.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. There was love affairs between the victim and this petitioner and the victim went with this petitioner out of her free will and consent. They also solemnized marriage in Singheshwar temple on 17.03.2021. It is next submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58733 of 2021(3) dt.28-03-2022 2/2
occurrence took place on 11.03.2021 but the FIR has been lodged on 16.03.2021 without any explanation for such delay. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since 27.03.2021 and investigation in this case is complete.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that victim in her statement u/s 164 of the Cr. P. C. supported the prosecution case and during the course of investigation the victim was recovered from the house of this petitioner on 25.03.2021.
Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
BKS/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a case involving abduction and marriage under IPC Sections 366A and 34.
Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the petitioner's claim of consent and marriage justify granting bail.
Whether the gravity of the offence and the victim's coerced statement warrant rejection of bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Das
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
