Meena Devi @ Maya Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36526 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Meena Devi @ Maya Devi W/o Sanjay Yadav R/o Village- Pokhra (Kashipur Pokhra), Civil Aerodram, P.S- Magadh Medical, Dist- Gaya Jee. 2.
Sanjay Yadav S/o Nathnoon Yadav R/o Village- Pokhra (Kashipur Pokhra), Civil Aerodram, P.S- Magadh Medical, Dist- Gaya Jee. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
XXX W/o YYY R/o Village- Power Grid, Ramlagan Singh Colony, Road No.15, P.S- Magadh Medical, Dist- Gaya Jee.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Priya Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jai Narain Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and apprehending their arrest in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 445 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS and Section 8 of POCSO Act.
3. The allegation against petitioners is to involve in kidnapping the minor daughter of informant alongwith coaccused Saurabh Kumar who is son of the petitioners.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36526 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026 2/3 behalf of the petitioners that both petitioners implicated with present crime in question only for the reason that they are parents of the named co-accused Saurabh Kumar with whom daughter of the informant was in love. It is submitted that the daughter of the informant was recovered on 28.12.2025, whereafter her statement was recorded where she said the she was in love with co-accused Saurabh Kumar and she left her parental home out of her own free will.
5. Arguing further it is submitted that thrust of allegation as per FIR is against co-accused Saurabh Kumar and maximum allegation against petitioners is only to misguide the informant regarding whereabout of her daughter. Petitioners claimed clean antecedent
6. Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Sudama Singh learned counsel for the informant while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the copy of statement as recorded under Section 183 of BNSS not appears annexed with present bail petition, therefore, submission as advanced above should not be relied upon, however, he could not disputed the factual aspect as alleged through FIR that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36526 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026 3/3 thrust of allegation is available against co-accused Saurabh Kumar who is the son of the petitioners.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as prima-facie allegation of kidnapping is not available against petitioners, where their implication with present crime in question is prima-facie being parents of the main co-accused, accordingly all above-named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, are directed to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge VI cum Spl. Judge of POCSO Act, Gaya /concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 445 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Sudha/- U T