Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13408 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2023 Thana- KUNDWACHAINPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pintu Kumar Ramjinish Ray @ Ramjinis Rai @ Ramjinish Yadav Resident of village - Badaka Gurmiya P.S.- Ghorasahan District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The petitioner in association of other co-accused is said to have kidnapped the sister of the informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, the victim eloped with Ravi Kumar and only in pressure of her family members and harass the petitioner and his family member implicated in the present case. The allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13408 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/2 levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 18.10.2024.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T