Dismissed

Ajrudin Miya @ Azahruddin v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Oct 2022CR. MISC./8386/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench was asked to decide on the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an abduction case under Section 366(A)/34 IPC involving a minor. The court found that the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement specifically named the petitioner as the kidnapper. Consequently, the court rejected the plea for anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

Ajrudin Miya @ Azahruddin Vs the State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8386 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2021 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Ajrudin Miya @ Azahruddin S/O Abas Miyan R/O Village- Badhara, P.S.Gopalpur, Distt.- Gopalganj

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shubhesh Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.A.G. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 18-10-2022

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶12

learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

It is alleged that minor girl of the informant has

¶15

been abducted by all the F.I.R named accused persons including the petitioner.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in

¶17

this case. The victim has been recovered by the police. The F.I.R is registered against four accused persons but

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8386 of 2022(3) dt.18-10-2022 2/2

¶19

the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C statement has only stated the names of the petitioner and one other person which

¶20

creates serious doubt about the authenticity of the prosecution case.

¶21

In contra, learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of

¶22

the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C statement has specifically named the petitioner as a person who has kidnapped her and took her to different place without her consent.

¶23

Considering the fact that the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C statement has specifically named the petitioner as a person who kidnapped her, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶24

The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

¶25

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶26

Shageer/-

¶27

U T

Ajrudin Miya @ Azahruddin v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajrudin Miya @ Azahruddin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Choudhary @ Vijay Kumar Choudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Suman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jagat Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ratan Ray Vs the State of Bihar

Indal Sahni Vs the State of Bihar

Akhter Farookhi @ Akhter Sah Vs The State of Bihar