Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Mahto vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2234 Patna

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7853 of 2021
   Arising Out of PS Case No.-37 Year-2020 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
   ======================================================

1. Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Mahto, aged about 48 years, Gender-Male, Son of Ramji Prasad.

2. Sanju Devi, aged about 42 years, Gender-Female, Wife of Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Mahto.

3. Puja Kumari, aged about 22 years, Gender- Female, Daughter of Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Mahto.

All are residents of Village - Gaurav Nagar, PS - Parbalpur, District - Nalanda.

4. Umashankar Prasad, aged about 45 years, Gender- Male, Son of Late Kishori Prasad, Resident of Village - Diyama, PS - Karai, District - Nalanda

.... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Udbhav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 03-06-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Udbhav, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Laheri PS Case No. 37 of 2020 dated 28.01.2020, instituted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 7853 of 2021 dt.03-06-2021

under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that the son

of petitioners no. 1 and 2 namely Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma had

abducted the daughter of the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the petitioner no. 1 is the father, petitioner no. 2 is the mother,

petitioner no. 3 the sister of said Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma and

petitioner no. 4 is the husband of maternal aunt of Vishal Kumar

@ Bhoma. It was submitted that they have no role in the matter

and in the statement of the girl recorded under Section 164 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as

the 'Code') she has stated that the son of petitioners no. 1 and 2,

that is, Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma, had taken her to Hilsa on the

pretext that he would marry her and stayed there for 3-4 days

and thereafter the petitioners had come and had assaulted her

and had taken back the son whereas the petitioner no. 1, upon

great persuasion, had taken the girl to her father's place.

Learned counsel submitted that the fact is that the girl is aged

about 21 years and Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma is aged 17 years,

which clearly indicates that it was the girl who, being major had

a greater influence on the son of petitioners no. 1 and 2 and

enticement is on the part of the girl and not their son Vishal Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 7853 of 2021 dt.03-06-2021

Kumar @ Bhoma. It was submitted that Vishal Kumar @

Bhoma has been released by the Juvenile Justice Board. Learned

counsel submitted that the petitioners have no role in the entire

episode and it was never a case of kidnapping as the daughter of

the informant had willingly gone with Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma.

Learned counsel submitted that he had taken time on 01.06.2021

to file supplementary affidavit which has been done. Though

learned counsel has submitted on the basis of the averments

made in the supplementary affidavit, but the Court deems it

appropriate to reproduce the same:

"x x x x

2. That it is being humbly submitted through the present supplementary affidavit that Vishal Kumar who is the FIR named accused of the present case is presently under the legal age of marriage which is 21 years and the petitioners have no problem with the relationship of Vishal Kumar with the daughter of the informant, namely Shilpi Kumari.

3 That the petitioners are ready to accept the marriage, in case Vishal Kumar and Shilpi Kumari wish to marry after Vishal Kumar attains the legal age of marriage of 21 years, and the petitioners further undertake to neither hamper nor impede nor try to influence the relationship between Vishal Kumar and Shilpi Kumari in any way either presently or in the future; and the wish to pursue and continue their Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 7853 of 2021 dt.03-06-2021

relationship will be theirs solely.

4. That the petitioners will neither in any way forbid Vishal Kumar from talking to Shilpi Kumari nor will in any way prevent Shilpi Kmari from talking to Vishal Kumar.

x x x x"

6. Summing up his arguments, learned counsel for the

petitioners submitted that the petitioners have no criminal

antecedent and they stand by their words that if at the

appropriate time when the parties are legally entitled to marry,

any decision taken by them would be fully acceptable to the

petitioners and there shall not cause any impediment in their

relationship to continue during the period also.

7. Learned APP submitted that there is allegation of

assault against the petitioners.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties and

specifically taking note of what has been stated in the

supplementary affidavit, as quoted hereinabove, as also that it

would be in the overall interest of justice that against the

petitioners, who are close relatives of Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma,

no drastic action is taken, as it may shut down the hope of any

reconciliation between the families and might even have adverse Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 7853 of 2021 dt.03-06-2021

effect on the relationship of Vishal Kumar @ Bhoma and the

daughter of the informant, if at all they are truly in love, taking

an overall view in the matter and for securing the ends of justice

and in the larger public interest, in the event of arrest or

surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today,

the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of

Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of

the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda in Laheri PS Case No. 37 of 2020,

subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the

Code and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close

relative of the petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors

shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good

behaviour of the petitioners, and (iii) that the petitioners shall

cooperate with the Court and the police/prosecution. Any

violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the

undertaking or non-cooperation or what has been stated in the

supplementary affidavit filed on their behalf, would lead to

cancellation of their bail bonds.

9. It shall also be open for the informant/prosecution to

bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the

petitioners, to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 7853 of 2021 dt.03-06-2021

take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of

hearing to the petitioners.

10. The application stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T