IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.12418 of 2011
BHARAT RAO AND ANR.
Versus
The State Of Bihar
-----------
4 30.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as
learned counsel for the state.
Petitioners are not named in the first information report
and their name surfaced in this case in confessional statement
of co-accused, Sk Hakim. Admittedly, the victim has already
recovered but no TIP has been done. It appears that the
learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that the victim
has been recovered on the basis of disclosure made by the
petitioners but learned counsel for the petitioners points out that
the aforesaid recovery has been made on the basis of
statement given by co-accused, Sk. Hakim which is evident
from Paragraph-12 of the case diary. It is further contended by
him that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case
at the instance of one, Ajay Rai who happens to be close to co-
accused, Sk. Hakim. It is contended by him that as a matter of
fact, the daughter of above-said Ajay Rai eloped with petitioner
No. 2 and subsequently, aforesaid Ajay Rai lodged a case
against lover of his daughter as well as others including
petitioner No. 2 and that is the reason of false implication of the
petitioners.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
2
circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties,
let the petitioners, namely, Bharat Rao and Pappu Rao @
Babloo Rao @ Abhay Rao be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No.
170 of 2010 to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Raxaul (in-charge) at Motihari.
AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)