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.)