Ramesh Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4746 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2025 Thana- KHIRHAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ramesh Mukhiya S/O Laxmi Mukhiya @ Laxmi Bind R/o village - Semhali, P.s- Khirhar , District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Meera Devi W/O Dilip Mandal R/o village - Borhar, P.S. - Khirhar, District - Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioner kidnapped her minor daughter for marrying on 11.02.2025. Further, both were studying in the same coaching centre, accordingly, the informant went to the house of the petitioner when his family members assaulted and ousted her from the house saying that she is falsely implicating the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4746 of 2026(2) dt.23-03-2026 2/2 informant. It is further submitted that petitioner and the victim were known to each other and the victim has come back and her statement was recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that specific pleading to that effect that has been made at para 10 and 11 of the anticipatory bail application. It is also submitted that since informant was aware that petitioner and the victim were in love, as such, the FIR came to be instituted after nine days of the occurrence without any plausible explanation of delay.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Khirhar P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T