Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77559 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2024 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar, Son of Surendra Mahto @ Samindra Mahto @ Sumindra Mahto, Resident of Village - Majhaur Ward No. 10, Police Station - Nanpur, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Indrajeet Raut, Son of Shivnandan Raut, Resident of Village - Majhaur Ward No. 10, Police Station - Nanpur, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 302 of 2024 dated 23.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 363, 366A read with section 34 of the IPC and section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant has been kidnapped by the petitioner and his friend Mukesh Thakur for the purpose of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77559 of 2024(5) dt.21-04-2025 2/2 this case due to suspicion. He further submits that petitioner has love affair with the victim and she used to talk with Sanjay Kumar (petitioner). In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she was not forced or seduced to have illicit intercourse with another person. She has not levelled allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 24.06.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned/Additional Sessions Judge 6th cum Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sitamarhi in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 302 of 2024.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) khushbu/- U T