Saraswati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6133 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2025 Thana- ANTICHAK District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Saraswati Devi Wife of Amit Kumar Choudhary @ Amit Kumar Resident of village - Kasdi, P.S.- Antichak, District - Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Y Son of Late Ramswaroop Mahaldar R/O village - Kasdi, P.S.- Antichak, District - Bhagalpur.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh For the informant :

Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 28.08.2025 in connection with Antichak P.S. Case No. 83 of 2025, for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of BNS.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 11.08.2025 at 08.00 hrs in morning, Saraswati Devi has disappeared the informant's daughter namely the victim "x" by curing her who is only 15 years. It is further alleged that last time some persons has seen his daughter with Saraswati Devi at Kahalgaon.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6133 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026 2/2

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS has particularly stated that the petitioner took her to an unknown place where she kept her in a room and a young boy had committed rape upon her and the medical report of the victim also suggests that she has been sexually assaulted by the accused persons and on the date of occurrence the victim was minor and her date of birth is 15.02.2010 which suggests that on the date of occurrence the victim was minor.

6. Considering the nature of allegation supported by medical evidence, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Antichak P.S. Case No. 83 of 2025, pending in the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO-cum-District and Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Bhagalpur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T