Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55491 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2024 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar S/o Jaynandan Yadav Resident Of VillageGazipaita, Ward No. 14, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District- Saharsa, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Dholan Paswan S/o Late Pavitra Paswan Resident of Ward No. 16, Jagir, P.S.- Saur Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa (Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Binay Krishna, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard Mr. Amarnath Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 389 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 366, 364(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code later on added section 376(D), 302, 201, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act as also section 3(i)(r)(s)W(ii), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, lodged on 23.06.2024 by the informant Dholan Paswan.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that her daughter was married to Jyotish Paswan. On 19.06.2024, when she failed to return, in-laws were contacted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55491 of 2025(2) dt.12-08-2025 2/2 and got no information. Later, she received a call of her son-inlaw Jyotish Paswan but the daughter was on the other side who was crying and then disconnected the phone. Later, his other son-in-law received a call demanding Rs.50,000/- as an amount to return the girl failing which it was threatened that she will be sold. This led to the F.I.R.

4. Subsequently, as the story unfolds, the allegation is that she was raped and killed. One Vipin Kumar was picked up and he confessed that alongwith this petitioner, the victim was raped and later killed. It is to be noted that he was minor at the time of her killing.

5. Considering the gravity of the case as also the role of the petitioner which has come subsequently in the confessional statement and Vipin Kumar where allegation is of raping and killing a minor, in that background, no relief can be extended to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T