Ranjan Ram @ Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14427 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2024 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ranjan Ram @ Ranjan Kumar S/O Nagendra Ram Resident of villageAdamvan, P.S.- Bairgania, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Rambrich Ram S/O Chulahai Ram Resident of village- Adamvan, PostBenghai, P.S.- Bairgania, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ayush Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seek bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 137(2), 140 (3), 96 and 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that his minor daughter had gone for coaching classes however, she did not return and despite hectic search she could not be located and then it was alleged that it was the petitioner ( Ranjan Ram ) along with one Nagendra Ram who kidnapped his minor daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14427 of 2025(4) dt.16-07-2025 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case as no such alleged incident has occurred. It is further submitted that there is no eye-witness to the incident and on mere suspicion the name of the petitioner has been inserted. Learned counsel next submits that the girl was recovered from her maternal house and she gave statement before the police as well as under Section 183 B.N.S.S. and, she has not alleged any untoward conduct towards her by the petitioner and she in her statement under Section 181 B.N.S. has stated that she had gone along with the petitioner out of her sweet will. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 20.11.2024.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has stated that there is specific
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail, upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/concerned court, in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 168 of 2024 subject to the following conditions: a. One of the bailor of the petitioner shall be his close
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14427 of 2025(4) dt.16-07-2025 3/3 relative.
b. The petitioner will remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail and if the prosecution is found involvement of the petitioner in similar nature of offence, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
d. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step of cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Siddharth Soni/- U T