Md. Sojan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21711 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2024 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Md. Sojan Son of Md. Ainul Resident of Village - Rajganj, P.S. - Pirpainti, District - Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 04-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pripainti P.S. Case No. 339 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 366A, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Prosecution case in brief is that minor daughter of the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner along with other co-accused person. It is further alleged that when the informant along with her husband reached at the house of the petitioner, they were abused.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21711 of 2025(2) dt.04-04-2025 2/3 against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that from perusal of the FIR, it would reveal that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. It is submitted that victim was in love with co-accused, namely, Md. Rocky and she had gone with him at her own sweet will, which fact is enumerated in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023. It is submitted that co-accused, Md. Rocky, with whom the victim allegedly fled and performed marriage has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 31-01-2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 81411 of 2024. 5.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the nature and gravity of offence, in my view, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

8.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21711 of 2025(2) dt.04-04-2025 3/3 order of this Court.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T