IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18626 of 2010 ALLAUDDIN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 28.6.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The victim girl was either kidnapped or she eloped with co-accused Abdul Rahim. F.I.R. is to the effect that witnesses told the informant about kidnapping by Abdul Rahim and his two associates but not the petitioner rather he was approached by the informant even assured to help in search of victim girl. Thereafter the victim was taken to parental house and her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which petitioner has been shown as one of the kidnappers. According to learned counsel, only to pressurize in revenge of the act of petitioner’s son, petitioner has been implicated. The motive shown by the victim girl also is not justifying petitioner’s hand in the incident if really it was kidnapping. In any case, refusal of anticipatory bail never can be justified. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the 2 date of communication of this order, the above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnia in Routa P.S. Case No. 01/2010, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. AI ( Mandhata Singh, J.)