Sachit Paswan @ Suchit Paswan @ Sushil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16768 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2021 Thana- AAYAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Sachit Paswan @ Suchit Paswan @ Sushil Kumar S/o Baban Paswan @ Baban Ram Resident of Village - Isarhi, P.S.- Aayar, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Laxman Mahto S/o Late Kalpnath Singh Resident of Village - Isarhi, P.S.- Aayar, District - Bhojpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter had gone to attend the call of nature but did not return and during search, it transpired that petitioner has kidnapped the victim girl with an intent to marry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the victim came back and her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16768 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 2/3 parental pressure wherein she stated that petitioner and Amarjeet Kumar committed wrong with her. It is next submitted that Amarjeet Kumar had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 67106 of 2023 and the same came to be allowed vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed by the then learned Coordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that petitioner is also in custody since 09.02.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the case of the prosecution and has stated that petitioner along with Amarjeet Kumar committed wrong. It is further submitted that Amarjeet Kumar was in judicial custody since 21.04.2023 and was granted the privilege of regular bail by an order dated 06.02.2024.
6. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that though the victim alleges that wrong was committed but then she did not get herself medically examined. It is further submitted that the victim is a major aged about 20 years and she was having friendly relation with the petitioner and had accompanied the petitioner on her own sweet will but when the instant case came to be instituted she came
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16768 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 3/3 back and under parental pressure implicated the petitioner and Amarjeet Kumar without any medical examination.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in connection with Aayar P.S. Case No. 93 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Bhojpur at Ara/Successor Court.
8. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.
9. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T