Single judge order granting regular bail to the petitioner in a child abduction case under IPC sections 363 and 366(A), noting the victim's voluntary return and lack of specific allegations against him in her statement.
Petitioner enlarged on bail via bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of 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.4634 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2022 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Dilkhush Kumar Son Of Manoj Malakar Resident Of Village- Ward No.-7, Patori, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
2 06-04-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State .
The petitioner has filed the instant application
for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case in nutshell is that when the wife and minor daughter of the informant was walking at the door of her house, petitioner along with other co-accused persons abducted the minor daughter
of the informant on gun point and when the informant
made complaint to the family of petitioner about the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4634 of 2023(2) dt.06-04-2023 2/3
incident and asked about his daughter, they threatened him and denied to return his daughter.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is inordinate delay of 4 days in lodging the F.I.R. It is further submitted that victim suo-motto returned and she has not whispered about the complicity of this petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has stated that she was in love with the petitioner and she went with the petitioner with her own sweet will. She has not alleged about any wrong with her by the petitioner. the alleged offence. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 12.05.2022. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for Bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4634 of 2023(2) dt.06-04-2023 3/3
and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 103 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J. VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO) Madhepura.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
nirajkrs/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserving of bail in a case of child abduction punishable under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of IPC.
Whether the explanation of the minor victim returning voluntarily negates complicity of the petitioner.
Whether the inordinate delay in lodging FIR warrants bail.
Dilkhush Kumar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
