Mishrilal Ray @ Mishri Rai @ Mishri Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69879 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2022 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mishrilal Ray @ Mishri Rai @ Mishri Ray Son of Late Bhaglu Rai Resident of Village - Yamunia @ Majurwa, P.S. - Sonbarsa, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 363 , 370, 374, 504, 506 and 34 of the Ipc and 16 , 17 and 18 Bonded Labor System Abolition Act 1976 and U/S 3 / 14 Child Labour Act and Section 75 and 79 of Juvenile Justice Act.
3 . As per the prosecution case , petitioner took son of informant along with other children to Punjab for their engagement and doing domestic labour in January 2021 after giving Rs. 1500/- to the informant. But later on , the informant came to know that this petitioner committed torture to her son and kept him hungry and also not paid any wages to informant. It is further alleged that other children returned to their house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69879 of 2024(3) dt.08-01-2025 2/2 but son of informant did not return and when informant made query at the house of the petitioner , he abused and threatened her with dire consequences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case on account of money dispute . It is further submitted that the alleged occurrence took place in January 2021 whereas the informant has given written application to the police for registration of F.I.R., on 30.08.2022 i. e,. after lapse of one year and 8 months of the alleged occurrence . It is next submitted that victim boy has already been recovered.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. The victim in 164 Cr.P C statement has supported the prosecution case .
6. Considering the 164 Cr.P C statement of the victim and gravity of offence , prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T