IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12383 of 2011 SANJAY KUMAR RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 29.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Although, there is allegation against the petitioner that he forcibly took the informant’s grand daughter but admittedly, the victim has been recovered from the house of the petitioner within four hours of the alleged occurrence and after that her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there was love affair between the petitioner and victim girl and, as a matter of fact, she had herself come at the house of the petitioner and moreover, the other accused have already been granted privilege of bail. Although, the victim girl has supported the prosecution story in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. but admittedly, she was recovered on 24.09.2010 but her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded on 26.09.2010 and between the aforesaid period she was remained in custody of the informant. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief 2 Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with Town Darbhanga P.S. Case No. 143 of 2010. Shahzad (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J )