Munna Singh @ Munna Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26028 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2024 Thana- IMADPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Munna Singh @ Munna Yadav S/o Baban Yadav Resident of village and P.S.- Imadpur, District- Bhojpur, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akhouri Vipin Bihari Shrivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Rabish Kumar, Advocate Mr. Adarsh Gaurav, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2025 Heard Mr. Akhouri Vipin Bihari Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rabish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 156 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 20.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 96 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner helps the co-accused, Deepak Kumar to abduct the daughter of the informant with intention to marry her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that in fact, the petitioner is not named

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26028 of 2025(3) dt.03-07-2025 2/2 in the F.I.R and his name has been transpired during investigation and no other material has come during investigation which suggest the invovlement of the petitioner in the present occurrrence.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim has taken the name of the petitioner which was recorded in the paragraph no. 54 of the case diary and apart from that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. / Section 183 of the BNSS in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner and coaccused person have abducted her.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 156 of 2024 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ara, Bhojpur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T