Allowed

Lal Babu Das @ Lal Babu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Nov 2024CR. MISC./37711/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under section 366-A IPC concerning alleged abduction of a minor. The court noted a one-year delay in lodging the FIR, the petitioner's year in custody, his young age and clean antecedents, and released him on bail with conditions including sureties and no witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 10,000 with two like sureties, subject to conditions on attendance and non-tampering.

Lal Babu Das @ Lal Babu Kumar Vs The State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37711 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-432 Year-2023 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur

¶3

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

¶4

Lal Babu Das @ Lal Babu Kumar Hari Kishun Das @ Harikishan Das R/O Khoksasaha, ward no - 15, P.S. - BIBHUTIPUR, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

BALESHWAR MAHTO SON OF LATE RAM DAYAL MAHTO R/O VILLAGE - KHOKSASAHA, WARD NO. 15, P.S.- BIBHUTIPUR, DISTSAMASTIPUR

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Renu Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶12

6 11-11-2024 Heard Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶13

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 432 of 2023 for the offence punishable under section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 20.11.2023 by the informant, Baleshwar Mahto.

¶14

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his minor daughter left her house but failed to return. Later, it came to knowledge that the petitioner has abducted her and when they approached his family, information was given to pay Rs. 5,00,000/-. Accordingly, the FIR.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37711 of 2024(6) dt.11-11-2024 2/3

¶17

alleged occurrence is of 24.11.2022 whereas the FIR was lodged on 20.11.2023, almost a year later. Further, they were in relationship and a notary affidavit was also made in this regard but later, due to pressure of the family, she changed herself which led to his custody for almost a year [20.11.2023 (paragraph-17 of the petition)]

¶18

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the girl has alleged forcible exploitation against this petitioner.

¶19

In this case notices were issued to the other side but no one has appeared on call.

¶20

Considering the facts that has come in the present case, there is an inordinate delay of one year in lodging of the FIR, he has already remained in custody for a year, is only 21 years of age, do not have any criminal antecedent and keeping him in jail with dreaded criminals will not help the matter, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.

¶21

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Rosera, Samastipur in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 432 of

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37711 of 2024(6) dt.11-11-2024 3/3

¶23

2023 subject to the following conditions:

¶24

(i) one of the bailor should be the family

¶25

member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶26

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶27

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶28

(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶29

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶30

Adnan/-

¶31

U T

Lal Babu Das @ Lal Babu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Babu Das @ Lal Babu Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramila Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Thakur @ Amit Sharma @ Amit Thakur Vs the State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Sah Vs the State of Bihar

Firoj Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar

Mannu Yadav @ Manua Vs The State of Bihar