Bisekha Devi @ Vishekha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35358 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1308 Year-2024 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Bisekha Devi @ Vishekha Devi W/o Manohar Badhai R/o vill - Kahra, ward no. 6, P.S.- Saharsa, Distt.- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Santosh Kumar S/o Late Chhattu Sada R/o vill - Birwar, P.S.- Mahishi, Distt.- Saharsa, at present ward no. 6/40, Paswan tola, south of murhi mill, P.S. - Saharsa, Distt.- Saharsa ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1308 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant namely, Santosh Kumar has alleged that on 27.11.2024, when his wife went to their daughter's room, she found it locked from the inside. Upon opening the window, they came to know that their daughter was missing. He further raised suspicion that his daughter had been kidnapped by one Mahapurushn Kumar (the petitioner's son) being in collusion with her mother.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35358 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and she has committed no offence rather she has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive of the informant. From perusal of the F.I.R. itself, it would appear that the petitioner is next door neighbour of the informant and he suspected only that the family members of Mahapurush Kumar helped for kidnapping his minor girl. It is further submitted that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and during the course of investigation, her name surfaced in this case. The petitioner is mother of Mahapurush Kumar and she is totally unaware of the incident and due to inimical terms she has been implicated in this case.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. During course of the investigation, the victim minor girl has been recovered and she has given her statement under Section 183 of BNSS. In her statement, she alleged that the petitioner had offered sweets and after consuming the same, she became unconscious. She later found herself at Delhi. As noted in paragraph 45 of the case diary, the allegations under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act against the petitioner and her son have been found to be true. Investigation is still going on.

7. In these circumstances, I am not persuaded to grant

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35358 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025 3/3 the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

8. However, if the petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the Court below on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order. (S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U T