IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.2211 of 2011
MANOHAR SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
2. 01.04.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner
is permitted to make necessary correction in
prayer portion of the petition.
Heard the learned counsels for the
petitioner and the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his
arrest in connection with Chiraiya
(Shikarganj) P.S. Case No. 55 of 2010
registered under Sections 366 and 120(B) of
the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged against Chhotu Kumar
Singh, the son of the petitioner, to have
enticed away the daughter of the informant.
It appears that the petitioner being
the father of said Chhotu Kumar Singh
assisted his son in committing the crime.
This fact has been supported by the victim
in her statement recorded under Section 164
Cr.P. C.
It is submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that Chhotu Kumar
Singh has been granted regular bail by a
2
Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 40391
of 2010.
I see no reason for the learned
court below to give the same privilege to
the petitioner since the thrust of the
accusation is against Chhotu Kumar Singh and
not against the petitioner.
Let the learned court below consider
the regular bail application of the
petitioner and try to dispose off the same
preferably on the same day considering the
fact that the F.I.R. was lodged after ten
days of the occurrence, if the petitioner
surrenders and prays for regular bail within
a period of four weeks from today.
With this observation, the
application is disposed off.
Let the order be faxed to the
learned S.D.J.M., Sikrahna at Motihari in
connection with Chiraiya(Shikarganj) P.S.
Case No. 55 of 2010 at the cost of the
petitioner.
U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)