Abhishek Kumar @ Lallu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46308 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2023 Thana- DUMARIYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar @ Lallu S/o- Dharmdeo Paswan Resident of VillageSalaiya Tola Kasiyadih PS-Dumariya District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Akbari Khatoon W/o- Late Abdul Rahman Resident of Village- Salaiya Tola Kasiyadih PS-Dumariya District- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md Jubair Ansari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP For the Informant :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary. None appears on behalf of the informant despite notice being validly served.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dumariya P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 363, 366A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Accusation against the petitioner is of luring away the informant's minor daughter with intention to marry her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of two days in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46308 of 2025(4) dt.08-10-2025 2/2 which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner and the victim are covillagers and have fallen in love with each other. He further submitted that victim is major as per the medical report. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that the petitioner established physical relationship with her against her will, and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T