Patna High CourtCR. MISC./17441/2025bail granted

Sanjay Kumar Deo v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-23Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17441 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2024 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar Deo, S/O Late Jitendra Prasad Deo @ Jiten Deo R/O VillageTharbitta, P.S- Kishanpur, Distt.- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Sona Devi W/O Ram Sada R/O Village- Tharbitta Ward No. 7, P.SKishanpur, Distt- Supaul. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan Mr. Vijay Kumar Das Mr. Pawan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 115(2), 351(2), 96 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases. It is next submitted that in sum and substance, the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other got the minor daughter of the informant married with a boy of village- Bahuarwa, but after marriage, the informant was not able to talk to her daughter and when husband

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17441 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 of the informant came back home and wished to meet his daughter, they approached the accused persons including the petitioner for arranging their meeting with their daughter on 13.09.2024, but then, the accused persons refused.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that the victim has come back and her statement was recorded under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution rather has stated that her marriage with a boy from Rajasthan was performed with consent of her parents, thereafter the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. wherein she has given a one line statement that petitioner got her married.

It is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if what is being alleged in the FIR to be true that the victim's marriage with her husband was performed at the instance of the petitioner and other, then why the husband of the victim has not been made an accused, which amply demonstrates that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case for the reason that informant and her husband got their minor daughter married to a person from Rajasthan as would manifest from Annexure- P/2 series at Page-18 also where photographs of the informant is seen giving blessing to the victim and her husband.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17441 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3

5. Learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application, but then, are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that husband of the victim has not been made an accused in the instant case.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions JudgeVI-cum-Special Judge Exclusive, POCSO Court, Supaul in connection with POCSO Case No.134 of 2024 arising out of Kishanpur P. S. Case No.264 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T