The Hon'ble High Court at Patna heard an application for anticipatory bail in a case alleging abduction of a minor under Section 366(A) IPC. The court rejected the prayer due to specific allegations in the section 164 Cr.P.C. statement that the accused forcefully took the victim.
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.9161 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-646 Year-2021 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Chandan Kumar Son Of Shasibhusan Pandit Resident Of Village - Aattasaray, P.S.- Nursarai, Distt.- Nalanda. At Nursarai.
.. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
3 03-11-2022
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
... ... Opposite Party/s
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a
case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged against the petitioner that he has
abducted the minor daughter of the informant.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case. It is further submitted that petitioner is the
student of I.T.I and on the alleged date of occurrence,
the petitioner had appeared in the examination of his
course which was 50 K.M away from the place of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9161 of 2022(3) dt.03-11-2022 2/2
occurrence. Moreover, the victim was recovered from the house of the informant itself.
Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the victim in her
statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C has specifically alleged against the petitioner that he forcefully took her to the house of his sister where they stayed for some days.
Considering the fact that the victim in her 164 Cr.P.C statement has specifically alleged against the petitioner to have forcefully took her to his sister’s house, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner
stands rejected.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
Shageer/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused apprehending arrest in a case involving abduction of a minor.
Whether the victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. justifying the allegation of forceful taking outweighs the accused's claim of false implication.
Chandan Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
