Gulshan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12327 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2025 Thana- Ramgarh Chowk District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Gulshan Kumar Son of Tuntun Yadav @ Bhagat Ji Resident of villageParsawan P.S- Ramgarh Chowk Dist -Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailesh Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2026 Heard Mr. Shailesh Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Khurshid Anwar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 01.12.2025 in connection with Ramgarh Chowk P.S. Case No. 215 of 2025, FIR dated 24.11.2025 registered for the offence under Section 96 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

3. According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioner abducted her minor daughter by luring her, when she left her house for coaching.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been made accused in this case and Section 96 of BNS is not attracted against the petitioner. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12327 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 2/2 petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. and the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 01.12.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim's year of birth is 2012, which indicates that she was a minor on the alleged date of occurrence and her statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS in which she has stated that she had performed marriage with the petitioner. However, it is pointed out that nowhere in the bail petition has the petitioner mentioned that he had performed marriage with the victim. He further submits that the victim is minor and her statement has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Ramgarh Chowk P.S. Case No. 215 of 2025, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Lakhisarai.

7. Prayer is refused.

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