Parvati Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8678 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2025 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Parvati Devi W/O Tuntun Ram R/O Village- Bakaur, P.S- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda.
2.
Tuntun Ram S/O Raghunandan Ram R/O Village- Bakaur, P.S- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Dharmnath Prasad S/O Late Chhathu Prasad R/O Saifpur, East of Pillar No. 6, P.S- Ganga Bridge, Hajipur, Distt.- Vaishali. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on 04.11.2025, sister-in-law of informant went to market but did not return. Upon search, informant came to know that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners, have kidnapped his sister-in-law.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8678 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026 2/3 behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, there was love affair between co-accused Ranjeet Kumar and sister-in-law of the informant and petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely because they happen to be parent of co-accused Ranjeet Kumar. During investigation, the victim was recovered and in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has denied the factum of kidnapping and has categorically stated that she was in love with co-accused Ranjeet Kumar and out of her own sweet will, she fled away with him because her parents wanted to get her married somewhere else. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. and clean antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8678 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026 3/3 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 180 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T