Kanhaiya Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50613 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2018 Thana- VIDYAPATINAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Kanhaiya Paswan S/o Rambabu Paswan R/o Vill- Lodiyahi, P.S.- Bachhawara, Distt- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Vidyapatinagar P.S. Case No. 58 of 2018 in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 365, 370, 371 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner along with other accused persons had taken the son of the informant to work in the Delhi Metro and also promised to pay Rs. 8,000/- per month. After two months, when the informant enquired from the petitioner about his son, the petitioner made excuses and also did not pay the monthly wages to the informant. The informant suspects that this petitioner along with accused persons has sold his son to someone and also misappropriated his earned wages.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50613 of 2025(2) dt.12-09-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant has implicated the petitioner in this case only on suspicion. As a matter of fact, the son of the informant was of unsound mind and he himself left his house without the consent of the family and the petitioner has no concern with the alleged affair. During trial, up till now four witnesses have already been examined and none of them has supported the prosecution case. The petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the acquisition, deposition of witnesses and period of custody period of custody, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of District and Additional Sessions Judge, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur (Bihar) in connection with Vidyapatinagar P.S. Case No. 58 of 2018.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Neha/- U T