IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32553 of 2010 TUNTUN MISHRA @ RAJESH KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR -------- 06/ 12.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned P.P. for the State. Petitioner seeks his bail in connection with Sakra P.S. Case no. 61/2009 registered under sections 363,366A and 379/34 of the IPC. Petitioner is named in the first information report and it would appear from perusal of the FIR that the petitioner and his associates took away two minor girls. Subsequently, one girl namely, Hasina Khatoon returned to her home and she stated that she was forcibly taken away by the petitioner and his associates and they also committed rape on her. The second girl is still missing. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, as a matter of fact, there is some fishy in the prosecution case because if the aforesaid girls were forcibly taken away by the petitioner and his associates, the aforesaid girls would not have taken money and cash from their home. Since there is specific allegation of rape and kidnapping against the petitioner that is too, in respect of minor girls, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, at least, at this stage. Accordingly, his, prayer for bail stands rejected. However, if the second girl is returned/ recovered, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the learned court below - 2 - itself and if the petitioner does so, the learned court below shall consider regular bail application of the petitioner on it own merits without being prejudiced by this rejection order. Furthermore, since the case of the petitioner has already been committed to the court of sessions, the trial court shall take all possible efforts for early disposal of the case of the petitioner. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)