IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40683 of 2009 1. BANTI RAI @ HARENDRA RAI 2. Umesh Rai Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 8.1.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant. The case is that the petitioners enticed away 16-year-old daughter of the informant. The contention is that the girl has been found aged above 18 years by one of the institutions of repute in Delhi, vide Annexure-3 and that she had intimated to the Superintendent of Police, Chapra about herself being married to petitioner no.2 Umesh Rai and is residing with him at a particular place which appears at the foot of that annexure. The contention further is that the girl being married and she having herself gone out of her parents’ house to marry one of the accused, it is debatable whether any offence is made out or not. Be that as it may, regard being had 2 to the facts and the evidence placed on record and the submissions, let the two petitioners namely, Banti Rai alias Harendra Rai and Umesh Rai be admitted to bail, either in the event of their arrest by the police or surrender before the court below, on furnishing bonds each of Rs. 10,000/-( ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chapra. In Masarak P.S.Case N.63 of 2009, subject to the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)