Brajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59121 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== Brajesh Kumar S/o Shobha Yadav, R/o Village- Basatpur, P.S.- Pataur, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Manisha Kumari, D/o Bali Paswan R/o Village-Bucchama Lalu Nagar, P.S.- Sadar, Dist.- Darbhanga.
... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gagandev Yadav, Advocate Mr. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 27-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No.91 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 127(3), 118(1), 109, 137(2), 87 and 64 read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'B.N.S.').
3. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and is in custody since 05.07.2025.
4. Allegation against petitioner is to kidnap the informant and, thereafter, to establish physical relationship on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59121 of 2025(3) dt.27-11-2025 2/3 false pretext of marriage.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioner that as per statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short 'BNSS'), she was in affair with co-accused Krishna Bhagat with whom she was in live-in relationship for long two years prior to lodging this FIR. It is submitted that no allegation qua kidnapping or sexual assault appears raised by victim through her statement. While concluding argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted and, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
6. Arguing further, it is submitted that despite custody of four months, even victim could not examined by learned trial court within the meaning of Section 35(1) of the POCSO Act.
7. Learned APP opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
8. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59121 of 2025(3) dt.27-11-2025 3/3 taking note of statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, where she completely negate the allegation of sexual assault and also kidnapping qua petitioner, coupled with the fact that investigation of this case is already completed, where petitioner remains in custody since 05.07.2025, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Madhubani in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No.91 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'CrPC')/under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) Sanjeet/- U T