Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17600 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2024 Thana- NALANDA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Ravidas Son of Manoj Ravidas Resident of Village- Teju Bigha, P.s.- Nalanda, Distt.- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Gulnar Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nalanda P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, the petitioner along with other co-accused person have kidnapped married daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no eye witness of the said occurrence. There is delay of nine days in lodging the FIR. The victim girl has not been medically examined. It is further submitted that there was love affair
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17600 of 2025(3) dt.28-07-2025 2/2 between the victim and the petitioner and the victim on her own will fled away with the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 08.01.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of luring the married victim girl for the purpose of marriage. It is further submitted that the victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial. However, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production, the petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the Court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T