Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21181 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Dhorh @ Dhorha Sahni S/O Late Julam Sahni Resident of Village Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. Sugauli, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari. 2. Sri Sahni, S/O Julem Sahani, Resident of Village-Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. Sugauli, Distt. East Champaran, Motihari. 3. Satya Narayan Sahni, S/O Sri Sahni Resident of Village- Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S.-Sugauli, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari. 4. Vijay Sahni, S/O Sri Sahni, Resident of Village- Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. -Sugauli, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari. 5. Binod Sahni, S/O Sri Sahni Resident of Village- Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. -Sugauli, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari. 6. Kashi Sahni, S/O Sri Sahni, Resident of Village- Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. -Sugauli, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari. 7. Shyam Narain Sahni, S/O Sri Sahni Resident of Village- Shripur Tola Dharmpur, P.S. -Sugauli, Distt- East Champaran, Motihari. .... .... Petitioners Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 12-06-2012 A supplementary affidavit has been filed in the court on behalf of the petitioners, let it be kept on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with a case in which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] . It is stated that initially after inquiry, the learned Magistrate Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21181 of 2012 (2) dt.12-06-2012 2 / 3 2 took cognizance of the offence only against co-accused Ashok Thakur by order dated 15.2.2010. Subsequently, the complainant filed a revision application against the order taking cognizance before the learned District & Sessions Judge. Pursuant to the revisional order, by order dated 27.9.2011, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence as against the petitioners too. It is also submitted that co-accused Ashok Thakur has already been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 7.4.2011 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 8767 of 2011 by another bench of this Court. The case of these petitioners stand either on similar footing or on better footing to that of co- accused Ashok Thakur. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Tr. No. 2116 of 2010 arising out of C.R. No. 1050 (C) /06 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and also on the following conditions: (i) That both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioners who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioners. (ii) That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority. (iii) That they shall remain present before the court on the dates Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21181 of 2012 (2) dt.12-06-2012 3 / 3 3 fixed for hearing of the case. If they want to remain absent, then they will take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, they will immediately inform the court and request that they may be permitted to be present through their counsel. (iv) That liberty is given to the State to make an appropriate application for modifying/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioners violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court. Sanjeet/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 365

Statute Text:
Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person. Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person with intent to cause that person to be secretly and wrongfully confined, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.