Bail granted to a Man alleged of kidnapping and abducting Lady and her Son: High Court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.379320 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 427 Year 2019 Thana SURSAND District Sitamarhi Bimal Sah aged about 33 years Male S o Mangal Sah R o Village Ghaghara P.S. Parihar District Sitamarhi The State of Bihar ... Petitioner s ... Opposite Party s For the Petitioner s For the State CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Mr. Manoj Kumar Advocate Mr. Abhay Kumar No. 1 APP Date : 24 09 2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing. 2. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar No. 1 learned Additional Public Prosecutorfor the 3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Sursand PS Case No. 4219 dated 23.11.2019 instituted under Sections 363 366A 34 of the Indian Penal Code 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had kidnapped the wife and minor son of the informant 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the FIR itself it has been stated that the wife of the informant had gone away on her own volition along with the infant child Learned counsel submitted that in the statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 the lady has stated Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.379320 dt.24 09 2021 that she used to talk to the petitioner and the petitioner had called her but it has also been innocuously stated that the petitioner had locked her up and that she wanted to go back to her husband. Learned counsel submitted that neither there is allegation of the petitioner having abducted or kidnapped her nor is there any whisper of the petitioner doing any wrong act with the lady. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated having no other criminal antecedent. It was further submitted that witnesses have also stated that the lady used to frequently talk with the petitioner 6. Learned APP from the case diary did not controvert the fact that witnesses have stated that the lady used to talk to the petitioner. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in view of the statement in the FIR itself that the lady herself had gone away and she making no allegation with regard to any abduction or wrong act on the part of the petitioner and witnesses also stating in the same terms as also the petitioner not having any other criminal antecedent the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre arrest bail 8. Accordingly in the event of arrest or surrender Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.379320 dt.24 09 2021 before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs 25 000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Judicial Magistrate Pupri at Sitamarhi in Sursand PS Case No. 4219 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and furtherthat one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner andthat the petitioner shall cooperate with the Court and the police prosecution. Failure to cooperate shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. 9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the 10. The petition stands disposed of in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J

Summary: The man was alleged of kidnapping the wife and kid of the informant. In the light of all facts and circumstances, the man was granted bail by the High Court. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna before Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah held such in the matter of Bimal Sah v. The State Of Bihar[Criminal Miscellaneous No.37934 Of 2020]. The facts of the case are as the petitioner was arrested for having a connection with Sursand PS Case No. 427 of 2019 under Section 363, 366A, and 34 of Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is alleged for kidnapping the wife and minor son of the informant. Petitioner argued that informant’s wife and minor son went away on their own volition. The wife stated that she used to talk to the petitioner and he had locked her up and she wasn’t able to go back to her husband. Petitioner’s Learned Counsel plead that all the allegations were false and he didn’t try to kidnap or abduct her. Witnesses also confirmed that the lady used to talk to the petitioner quite frequently. The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor(APP) did not controvert the fact that witnesses have stated that the lady used to talk to the petitioner. The court ordered to release the petitioner on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 along with 2 sureties of the like amount subject to conditions as per Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The two conditions were first, Bailor should be a close relative and second, the petitioner should cooperate with the court. Failure to which would lead to cancellation of bail bond. The court said,” It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner, to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.”                                                                                              The Hon’ble High Court of Patna held,” Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in view of the statement in the FIR itself that the lady herself had gone away and she making no allegation with regard to any abduction or wrong act on the part of the petitioner and witnesses also stating in the same terms as also the petitioner not having any other criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail.”