Ram Pravesh Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2369 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- BHUTAHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ram Pravesh Mahto Son of Late Dularchand Mahto R/o Vill.- Araria, Ward No.- 14, P.O.- Araria, P.S.- Kanhauli, Dist.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

X Wife of Sri Chandeshwar Mahto R/o- At and P.O.- Dostiya Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Bhutahi, Dist.- Sitamarhi.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sitaram Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bhutahi P.S. Case No. 108 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Accusation against the accused persons including the petitioner is of luring away the victim girl on the pretext of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2369 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner never kidnapped the victim and, as a matter of fact, the petitioner is being dragged in this case merely because he happens to be the father of the main co-accused. Learned counsel further contended that there is love affair between the co-accused Ashish Kumar and the victim and the victim left her house on her own sweet will. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2025 and has one criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has supported the case of the prosecution and has specifically stated that the accused persons including the petitioner took her to Tamil Nadu, against her will.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2369 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026 3/3

9. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of five months from today. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T