Digvijay Rai @ Digvijay Kumar @ Digvijay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6479 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- TARIYANI CHAPRA PS DistrictSheohar ====================================================== Digvijay Rai @ Digvijay Kumar @ Digvijay Yadav S/O Vidyanand Rai Resident of Village - Vishambharpur, P.S- Tariyani Chappra, Dist- Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Pawan Devi W/O Sanjay Mahto Resident of Village - Vishambharpur, P.STariyani Chappra, Dist- Sheohar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Tushar Anand, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2025 Heard Mr. Tushar Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar No.2, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Tariyani Chappra P.S. Case No. 58 of 2020, F.I.R. dated 16.09.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. According to prosecution case, seven persons including the petitioner allegedly kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant with intention to marry with petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6479 of 2025(2) dt.31-01-2025 2/2 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during the investigation that statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has supported the case of the prosecution and on the date of the occurrence the victim was minor.

6. Considering the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Tariyani Chappra P.S. Case No. 58 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Sheohar.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T