BINOD KUMAR PANDEY Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is an accused in the case registered for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case due to ulterior malafide motive; the prosecutrix had been working as maid -servant and was instrumental in kidnapping the Petitioner's daughter; for that, the Petitioner had lodged an F.I.R. against the prosecutrix and the same was registered as Rail P.S. Case No. 23 of 2010 under Sections 342, 384, 379 and 365/34 I.P.C.; the instant case was a counter blast and intended to pressurize the Petitioner to part with some property in favour of prosecutrix; the Petitioner has no criminal antecedent; he is a local permanent resident; there is no chance of his absconding.

(3.) LEARNED APP opposed the prayer for bail of the Petitioner, but has not disputed the said contentions of learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the informant.