Ramashankar Yadav @ Ramashankar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33811 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-379 Year-2023 Thana- SIMRI District- Buxar ====================================================== 1.

Ramashankar Yadav @ Ramashankar Singh S/o Late Saryu Yadav Resident of Village-Barun Post Basudhar Police Station- Itarhi, District Buxar 2.

Bidyawati Devi @ Bibanti Devi W/o Ramashankar Yadav @ Ramashankar Singh @ Ramashankar Yadav R/o Vill- Barun, Post- Basudhar, P.S. Itarhi Distt. Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Indu Kumari D/o Bharat Yadav R/o Vill- Kazipur, P.S. Simri, Distt. Buxar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 341, 342, 323, 506, 376 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

3. The Informant, namely Indu Kumari, aged 16 years, alleged that on 16.12.2022, co-accused Dinesh Yadav took her to Rajasthan by alluring her for marriage and made physical relation with her. Later on, she came to know that he is already married, then co-accused threatened and assaulted her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33811 of 2025(3) dt.12-08-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is father and petitioner no. 2 is mother of coaccused Dinesh Yadav. He further submits that from bare perusal of F.I.R., it is apparent that both of them i.e. informant and co-accused Dinesh Yadav lived together, as husband and wife for more than three years. Even, in statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim categorically stated that she went with this petitioner out of her own volition and during investigation, she refused to be medically examined. Petitioners are parents of co-accused Dinesh Yadav, who has already been granted anticipatory bail, vide order dated 06.08.2025 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 24281 of 2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge 6th cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Buxar in connection with Simri P.S. Case No. 379 of 2023, subject to condition as laid

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33811 of 2025(3) dt.12-08-2025 3/3 down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T