IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23427 of 2010 PAPPU KUMAR SAH & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 03.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3 are in-laws of the complainant whereas petitioner no. 4 is the business partner of petitioner no. 2. All the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a Complaint Case in which cognizance has been taken under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that the complainant’s son Golu @ Rajesh was abducted on 1.2.2008 for which on 23.2.2008 the complaint was filed. Though the victim return on 21.2.2008 but the demand of ransom was also made. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant is none else but the wife of the elder brother of the petitioner no. 1 who initially lodged a case under Section 498A of the Penal Code. Since the husband resides in Harayana for his livelihood, hence the present case has been lodged as a pressure tactics on the in-laws for pressurizing the husband to come back to the complainant. 2 Considering the delayed lodging of the complaint after three weeks of the occurrence particularly return of the victim and the relationship of the petitioners with the complainant and the background in which present complaint is filed, let the petitioners, namely, (1) Pappu Kumar Sah (2) Rajendra Sah (3) Amresh Sah @ Amresh Sao (4) Bijay Sah @ Bijay Sao in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S.N. Mishra, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Munger in connection with Complaint Case No.194C/2008 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Anand Kr. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)