IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1970 of 2010 RATAN RISHIDEO, son of Bijal Rishideo, Resident of Village Deviganj, P.S. Narpatganj, District-Araria. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 22-02-2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Prayer for anticipatory bail in this case is with regard to an offence of the year 2002 vide Narpatganj P.S. Case No.127 of 2002 under sections 368 and 372/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Plea of the petitioner that the alleged kidnapping took place some time in the year 2001 and yet F.I.R. was filed in the month of August, 2002 and therefore when the petitioner now has apprehension in the year 2010 for being arrested, the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge that it was a pre-mature prayer for anticipatory bail, must be held to be irrational, is not tenable in law as the learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to take into account that requirement of anticipatory bail would be only available to a person who has apprehension of being arrested. It is not in doubt that the girl was recovered in 2005, yet the petitioner was not arrested in the next five years and infact for a total period of eight years. That being so, had the petitioner had woken up for grant of anticipatory bail in the year 2002 one could have understood the genuineness in such plea of the petitioner and therefore the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge does not 2 seem to be absurd. In fact, the word “pre-mature” used in such order has to be understood as “not warranted in law.” Therefore, if the petitioner had no apprehension of arrest from 2002 when the case was instituted or even in the next five years after recovery of the victim girl in 2005 only on account of certain statement given by the family members with regard to no such abduction of the victim girl by the petitioner he may happily continue to remain content with the alleged such statement on affidavit filed by the prosecution party but on such materials there would be no justification for seeking anticipatory bail after a period of eight years of the filing of the F.I.R. and the police case directly naming him as an accused. The petitioner being an absconder cannot claim privilege of anticipatory bail. That being so, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)