Saroj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5705 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Saroj Kumar S/O Jai Prakash Prasad Singh Resident of Vill.- Bhadas, Dakshini, Ward no. 11, P.S.- Gangour, District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Babita Devi W/O Muni Sahani Resident of Vill.- Bhadas, Dakshini, Ward no. 10, P.S.- Gangour, District- Khagaria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 87, 137, 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S..

3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, kidnapped minor daughter of informant for the purpose of marriage.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5705 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, along with other accused persons, kidnapped minor daughter of informant on the point of riffle and forcibly solemnized marriage. It is further submitted that during investigation, the victim was recovered and in her statement recorded under Sections 181 and 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has supported the prosecution case and has named this petitioner as one of the person who kidnapped her.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence and statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T