IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16173 of 2011 VINAY MISHRA @ PAPPU MISHRA @ VINAY KUMAR MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 23.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner along with his son and others have been alleged for kidnapping informant’s daughter. Submission is that informant’s daughters disappeared for a period of five months with four boys. If really was kidnapped using force then she is showing herself as major and did not disclose kidnapping for such a long period to anyone while remained in Delhi. Only to cast pressure, petitioner has been named by her only under pressure of her parents due to being the petitioner’s father of one Mukul Mishra. Taking that into consideration, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of communication of this order, the above named petitioner, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10, 000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 92 of 2010 subject to the condition laid down under section 438(2) Cr. P.C. Prakash ( Mandhata Singh, J.)