IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26597 of 2008 MUNITA DEVI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 25.09.2008 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offence under sections 363, 366A of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that she called the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years to her house and thereafter the daughter of the informant was found missing. Further allegation is that one of the relative of the petitioner namely, Munna Ram was also found missing. On enquiry/search being made by the informant, the girl could not be traced out. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the daughter of the informant and the said relative of the petitioner have married. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner with regard to the alleged offence relating to minor girl, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail deserves to be dismissed. Considering the submissions, as noticed above, - 2 - and the nature of allegation as also its seriousness, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Her prayer for grant of bail is, accordingly, rejected. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)