Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69587 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Ajay Kumar S/o Murat Ram Resident of village - Nandgawan, Suhawal, P.S - Chainpur, District - Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Neha Kumari C/o Kedar Ram R/o Village - Duiya, P.S - Chenari, District - Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 323, 341, 366(a), 376 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.01.2024, the petitioner took the informant/victim to Hyderabad. There, they lived as husband and wife. On 02.06.2024, the petitioner dropped the informant to village Bhadaula and assured her that after attaining majority, they will solemnize marriage. When the informant got major, her family members went to the house of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69587 of 2025(2) dt.08-10-2025 2/3 the petitioner where they were being assaulted and demand of dowry was also made.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the FIR itself, it is clear that the alleged occurrence is of 01.01.2024 whereas this case has been filed after much delay in the year 2025. From perusal of the FIR itself, it is clear that the main dispute regarding marriage as the victim/informant was pressurizing the petitioner to marry to which he denied, therefore, this case has been filed. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the allegations of taking away the informant is of 01.01.2024 whereas this case has been filed after more than one year. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 18.06.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69587 of 2025(2) dt.08-10-2025 3/3 petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Kaimur at Bhabua.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Shubham/- U T