← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65111/2025bail rejected

Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-12-08Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65111 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-458 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Manish Kumar S/o- Lakhindra Das Village- Hasanpur osti P.S- Mahua District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mrs. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 96, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that one Aman Kumar used to speak with the informant's daughter over phone. When the informant came to know about this, she went to confront Lakhindra Das. Thereafter, Lakhindra Das and the petitioner allegedly thrashed her and threatened to kidnap her daughter. It is further alleged that on 08.04.2025, the petitioner and two other accused persons came and forcibly took away the informant's daughter. The petitioner also assaulted the informant and threatened to kill her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65111 of 2025(3) dt.08-12-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and the allegation is that he along with other accused persons, kidnapped the victim. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., has also supported the prosecution case and has named the petitioner as one, who kidnapped her. The Trial Court has assessed the age of the victim to be 16 years.

5. Considering the nature of the accusations, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Neha/- U T