Pramod Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52440 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2024 Thana- NAUTAN District- Siwan ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Mahto, Male, aged about 21 years, son of Late Hirdyanand Mahto @ Hidaya Bhagat Resident of Village- Dhanukhai Bhwani Chhapar, Police Station- Shrirampur, District- Deoria, State- Uttar Pradesh ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Saket Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nautan PS Case No. 110 of 2024 dated 29.5.2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 366 A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The petitioner is alleged to have abducted the informant's daughter for the purpose of marriage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was filed after a delay of more than 19 days from the date of the alleged occurrence and no plausible explanation has been given by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52440 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/3 informant for this delay. Further submission is that the petitioner and the alleged victim were in a consensual relationship and the alleged victim went with the petitioner of her own free will without any inducement. When the victim's family members failed to bring her back, they allegedly filed a false case with the ulterior motive of pressuring her to return home. The petitioner has been in custody since 19.05.2025.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that there are direct and specific allegations against the petitioner of kidnapping the victim without her consent, forcibly marrying her and establishing physical relations with her against her will. It is further submitted that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 CrPC wherein, she has stated that on 12/05/2024 the petitioner abducted her. She further stated that the petitioner first took her to his village at Dhanukhai, U.P., where she stayed for some time. Thereafter, he took her to twothree different houses, including his sister's house, where she remained for 2-3 days. During this period, the petitioner allegedly forced her into marriage, applied vermilion on her forehead, and made her wear a mangalsutra. She has also stated that he established physical relations with her against her will.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52440 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 3/3 Subsequently, the petitioner took her to Maharashtra by train, where he arranged a room and kept her after making her consume some substance. She has further stated that he used to assault her and also forcibly established physical relations with her.
6. Considering the serious nature of the allegations and the victim's statement, this Court does not find it a fit case to release the petitioner on bail.
7. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and take all endeavour to conclude the trial at the earliest, preferably, within a period of nine (9) months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order.
8. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. (Khatim Reza, J) shyambihari/- U T