IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28090 of 2010 RAMANAND SAO. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR. ----------- 3. 23.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Allegation is about kidnapping of informant’s daughter. Petitioner name appeared in statement of the victim girl recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Petitioner presence and the place from where she was kidnapped is shown without any overt Act in statement under Section 161 Cr. P.C. only for Sanni Kumar, Shakti Kumar and unknown it is said that they went to a house with victim where she was rapped also goes to show that there was no involvement of this petitioner in kidnapping or in commitment of rape. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that she specifically named this petitioner also only after joining her family members including the informant and due to differences on the point of landlord and tenant, to cast pressure and on instigation of family members, but difference came to an end. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed. 2 In the event of his arrest or surrender within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in connection with Rajeev Nagar P.S. Case No. 28 of 2010, above named, petitioner shall 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 Judicial Magistrate, Patna subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. Anand Kr. ( Mandhata Singh, J.)