IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32395 of 2008 AJAY KUMAR @ AJAY KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR - - - - 2. 25.8.2008 Heard. The prayer for bail is in a case under Section 366 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that the petitioner took away or enticed away the daughter of the informant. The lady appears coming back to her parents’ house and it further appears that she was examined by a Doctor who reported her age to be 19-20 years. The learned Sessions Judge also had the girl before him, as appears from the rejection order passed by him, and it has been recorded by the learned Judge “ The victim girl Chitragda has appeared in the court. She appeared to be little nervous. She has stated on query by the court that she has married with this petitioner but she could not say the date and year of the marriage. She also could not say her date of birth but she has stated her age to be 20 years.” After return of the lady the police recorded her statement in paragraph 61 of the 2 case diary and she stated that she had love affairs with the present petitioner and probably she had left her house on that account. But in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure she went on to support the prosecution version of being taken away forcibly to one place or the other and being kept confined and being recovered with the petitioner from a particular house. The contention is that in the light of the evidence and her own statement before the learned Sessions Judge during the course of hearing of the prayer for bail of the petitioner, there could not be left any doubt that she could be aged above 19 years and she could, as such, be capable of taking her own decision. It was further contended that the lady went out of her parents’ house so as to herself getting married to the petitioner and after the case was registered she was picked up by the police and brought to her parents where she was made to change her stand as to supporting the prosecution version, as appears from her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3 Learned counsel appearing for the informant has opposed the prayer under lock, stock and barrel and submitted that the mater is still to be left with the investigating agency, especially, for re-determination of her age as the lady has gone very well changing her age before the police and before the learned Sessions Judge. It was contended further that the petitioner was accused in many cases and in that background it is not prudent for the Court to direct his release on bail. I find from the record that the lady appeared before the learned Sessions Judge and she was questioned by him on her age and marital status. There are two statements of the girl- one before the police and the other before the Magistrate. There could be real reasons which the Court does not want to attach upon for the change of stand of the victim as the lady appears competent and capable of taking her own decision. As things stand, the case does not appear such to reject the prayer for bail. Let the above named petitioner, under 4 the above circumstances, be directed to be released from custody on his furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-( ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Biddupur P.S.Case No. 48 of 2008. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)