Raju Ray @ Raju Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73127 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- HALAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Raju Ray @ Raju Kumar Ray, S/o Chandeshwar Ray, R/V- Bagraha (Kancha), P.S.- Vidyapatinagar, Dist.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Zeyaul Hoda, Advocate Mr. Thakur Brajesh Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Halai P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 96, 140(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the minor son of the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner and others.

4. During course of investigation, the victim was recovered and has given his statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. wherein he has stated that the petitioner and other three persons boarded him in a Bolero vehicle, administered

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73127 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 2/3 intoxicant in drink and afterward solemnized his marriage with a girl whom he was not knowing. The marriage was solemnized in Begusarai in a temple. After that, he was taken to Katihar. His signature was taken on a plain paper. The victim has stated that the petitioner was always there.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim boy has been recovered and no marriage was solemnized. Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 03.07.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that petitioner is person who is responsible for the offence and he has forcefully solemnized the marriage of a minor boy with a girl whom he was not knowing.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73127 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 3/3 bail after six months, if the trial is not concluded.

8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T