Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9093/2025rejected

Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-03-06Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9093 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- DEOKUND District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar S/O Sunil Chandravanshi @ Sunil Ram Resident of Vill.- Deokund, P.S- Deokund, Dist- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025 Heard Mr. Ravindra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Deokund P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 06.04.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 504, 506, 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, the present petitioner used to molest the daughter of the informant. On 04.04.2024, when she went to school and did not returned then the informant along with family members started searching for her. Then he came to know that his daughter has been kidnapped by the present petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9093 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/2 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the FIR itself that there is allegation against the petitioner that he has kidnapped the daughter of the informant and apart from that statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C./Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 in which she has categorically stated that petitioner has abducted her and on the date of the occurrence the victim was minor.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Deokund P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Daudnagar, Aurangabad.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T