IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28183 of 2008 NIRMAL KUMAR KESHARI & MUNA KESHARI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 4.9.2008 Heard. The case was initially registered under Section 364A/34 of the IPC for the abduction of the son of the informant which took place on 23rd April,2008. Subsequently, as may appear from paragraph 85 of the case diary and some other parts of it like 45 and 46 the dead body could be located on 26.4.2008 and the same was sent for postmortem examination. None was named in the FIR and no suspicion was expressed against any one. Subsequently, it appears that on account of enmity with the present petitioners for which there had been a proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C. as well in 2003 as may appear from statements of paragraph 84 and 85, the names of the petitioners were implicated. In spite of there being a written report which could be the basis of the FIR, another written report as appearing in para 84 was filed and that was for the first time that suspicion was raised against the petitioners of having kidnapped the child and caused his disappearance - 2 - or murder. The motive was also alleged that the son of the informant was having an affair with the daughter of the petitioner Nirmal Kumar Keshari and for that there was some dispute and that Nirmal Kumar Keshari wanted his daughter to be married to the boy, which was not accepted by the family members of the informant and, in turn, the boy was married to another girl creating further discord and bad relationship between the two families which ultimately took the gory shape of the present incident. The family members of the informant examined in paragraph 85 and 92 have reiterated the facts which could be a motive for the incident and there does not appear any concrete material indicating as if there was the participation of the petitioner. Attempt also appears to be made by introducing the story of phone calls for ransom on 26.4.2008, i.e., three days after the incident but that part of the story does not name any one as may appear from statement of the grand father of the deceased recorded in paragraph 85. Having an overall view of the material so far collected in the case diary, I find that - 3 - it is a fit case in which the direction must issue for releasing the above named petitioners on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Bhojpur in Bihiya P.S.Case no.67 of 2008. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )