Buchan Turaha @ Buchan Sah @ Buchun Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30516 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2013 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Buchan Turaha @ Buchan Sah @ Buchun Sah S/O Vishwanath Sah VillageTuraha Toli Ram Nagar, Police Station- Ram Nagar, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 Heard Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 27 of 2013, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 366(A), 372 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner and other accused persons allegedly abducted and sold the informant's mentally unfit minor daughter for 50,000 after ₹ forcibly solemnizing her marriage, and thereafter threatened the informant when she attempted to rescue her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30516 of 2026(3) dt.21-07-2026 2/2

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 the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case in course of investigation. The petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2026 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 though the petitioner is not named in the FIR, but on perusal of statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. there is specific allegation levelled against the petitioner. 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.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T