Patna High CourtCR. MISC./8829/2026bail granted

Bhuttan Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-14Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8829 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- Mufassil District- Purnia ====================================================== Bhuttan Ray S/o Late Guru Ray R/o Pagalwbari, Ghatwar tola, ward no 8, PS- Manihari, Distt- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

X W/o Y R/o Diwanganj Panchayat Dimiya, ward no. 10, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Purnia ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 197 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have abducted the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2025 having clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8829 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026 2/2

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. From the statement of the victim girl, it appears that the victim girl had eloped with the petitioner and later got married with him.

7. Considering the aforesaid fact, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Purnia/ concerned Court below in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 197 of 2025.

8. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T