Vijay Pandit @ Vigam (Vigan) Pandit v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50693 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2025 Thana- Lakho District- Begusarai ====================================================== Vijay Pandit @ Vigam (Vigan) Pandit S/o Late Bholan Pandit R/o VillageKamathan, Police Station- Lakho, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-08-2025 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Lakho P.S. Case No. 47 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 96, 137(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Allegedly, the minor daughter of the informant was enticed away by one Shivam Pandit and did not return. In course of enquiry, the informant came to know that the boy was in touch with the petitioner, who is none else but the maternal uncle, whereupon the informant went to his house to enquire about her daughter. The petitioner and other family members assured that her daughter shall be returned, but she never came back, thus the present FIR.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50693 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 2/3 the victim was allegedly taken away by co-accused Shivam Pandit on 07.02.2025. But, surprisingly, the present FIR came to be instituted on 20.03.2025, after a delay of 41 days without there being any plausible explanation. Moreover, the petitioner is none else but the maternal uncle of the boy and only on account of the fact that his phone has even been used to talk with Shivam Pandit, therefore, his name has been implicated in this case. The petitioner has got no knowledge about the whereabout of the boy and the victim girl and now he has been apprehending his arrest due to implication of his name. The petitioner has absolutely fair antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the victim is still traceless and in fact, it is the petitioner and his family members, who should disclose about the whereabouts of the victim girl and the boy.
6. Having considered the submissions set-forth by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is the maternal uncle of the boy and there is a delay in lodging of the FIR, coupled with the fair antecedent as also the fact that no cogent material has collected
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50693 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 3/3 during the course of investigation against the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Lakho P.S. Case No. 47 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner. (Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U T