Ranjeet Paswan @ Ranjeet Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71032 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2023 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== RANJEET PASWAN @ RANJEET KUMAR PASWAN Son of Hareram Paswan Resident of Village-Chakkan Toli, P.S.-Kalyanpur, DistrictSamastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 23-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 363, 366, 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3, 4 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage POCSO Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he abducted minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity. It is further submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71032 of 2023(3) dt.23-01-2024 2/2 antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 22.06.2023.

Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the victim is minor aged about 12 years and there is specific allegation against the petitioner of abduction and wrong doings. As per statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., wherein she has stated that the petitioner used to pressurize her to solemnize marriage with him otherwise he will commit suicide, thereafter he forcibly took her New Delhi and solemnized marriage with her in a temple and also several times did wrong things with her. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact and gravity of the case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) manishkumar/- U T