Jai Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7237 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2023 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Jai Kumar Paswan Son of Ram Khelawan Paswan R/o Village Banailpatti Ward No 6 PS Birpur District Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Parmeshwar Yadav Son of Late Asarfi Yadav R/o Banailpatti, ward no. 6, P.S. - Birpur, Distt. - Supaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Murari Narain Chaudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 16-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Birpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2023/POCSO Case No. 40 of 2023, lodged on 26.01.2023, under Sections 366A/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against seven named accused persons against whom there is allegation of kidnapping is there.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7237 of 2024(3) dt.16-04-2024 2/2 custody since 08.02.2023. Counsel submits that as alleged in the FIR kidnapping has taken place by virtue of marriage. The victim has already been recovered. In her statement under Section 64 Cr.P.C. she has denied about solemnization of marriage but on the other hand she has supported the allegation of kidnapping.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail after framing of the charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T