Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 363 and 366(a)/34 IPC for alleged kidnapping of two young women, reportedly for marriage. The State opposed, noting the victim's Section 164 statement supported the prosecution. The Court declined anticipatory bail and rejected the application.
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.23067 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-464 Year-2023 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Chandana For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER
4 09-09-2024
Kumari Chandana, and learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23067 of 2024(4) dt.09-09-2024 2/2
for purposes of marriage.
(Satyavrat Verma, J.)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sudhir Kumar
Satrughan Mahto
Deb Kali Devi
The State of Bihar
Satyavrat Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
