Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31604 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2018 Thana- Hathiyav District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== 1.

Dilip Kumar S/o Raju Yadav R/o Vill.- Bihita, P.S.- Hathiyawa, Distt.- Sheikhpura 2.

Raju Yadav S/o Late Bramdeo Yadav R/o Vill.- Bihita, P.S.- Hathiyawa, Distt.- Sheikhpura 3.

Prince Kumar @ Guddu Yadav S/o Tarkeshwar Yadav @ Talekeshwar Yadav R/o Vill.- Bihita, P.S.- Hathiyawa, Distt.- Sheikhpura 4.

Tarkeshwar Yadav @ Talekeshwar Yadav S/o Late Mauji Yadav R/o Vill.- Bihita, P.S.- Hathiyawa, Distt.- Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ramashis Yadav S/o Late Jagdish Yadav R/o Vill.- Bihita, P.S.- Hathiyawa, Distt.- Sheikhpura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sheo Nandan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-11-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 363, 366/34 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, registered in connection with Sheikhpura (Hathiyawa) P.S.Case No. 222 of 2018.

3. As per allegation, the petitioners, in cahoots with their other accomplices, enticed away the daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31604 of 2025(4) dt.24-11-2025 2/3

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent having clean background and have falsely been implicated. It is further submitted that the allegation is against co-accused Deepak, Guddu and Jitu.

5. The victim in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC has stated that co-accused Deepak, Guddu and Jitu caught hold her and they forced themselves upon her. So far as petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 4 are concerned, the victim did not name them in her statement. So far as the petitioner no.3 Prince Kumar @ Guddu Yadav is concerned, the victim has named in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC along with other co-accused persons.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, let the petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 4 above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of communication of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO), Sheikhpura in connection with Sheikhpura (Hathiyawa) P.S.Case No. 222 of 2018, subject to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31604 of 2025(4) dt.24-11-2025 3/3 the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the CrPC/482(2) of the BNSS.

7. In view of the direct allegation against petitioner no.3 Prince Kumar @ Guddu Yadav, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion in his favour, against whom the victim has vividly stated his role in the entire episode, bringing disrepute/disgrace to the victim. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioner no.3 Prince Kumar @ Guddu Yadav is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR U T