Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73893 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2025 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan ====================================================== Chandan Kumar S/o Sri Kishori Lal R/o Mohalla - Jai Prakash Nagar, P.O - Siwan , P.S - Siwan, District - Siwan, State - Bihar, Pin - 841226 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter worked in Adauri factory and used to come to the house at 6 PM, but on 24.06.2025, she left for her work place but did not return till 7 P.M., thus he enquired from Chandan (petitioner), the owner of the factory, who disclosed that he was not aware of her whereabouts, it is next alleged that Chandan used to talk to the victim on phone and further alleges that petitioner along with Suraj abducted her daughter either for
2/4 marrying her or for some illegal purpose.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that petitioner is the owner of the factory as such it does not appear probable that petitioner would have abducted his own employee. It is further submitted that the name of the victim is Bablee Akhtar and she was in love with a person named Dinesh Yadav from Rajasthan, accordingly she went to Rajasthan and changed her name to Puja and married Dinesh and started living with him.
It is also submitted that after the case was taken up, the victim was recovered from Rajasthan and her statement under Section 183 BNSS was recorded, wherein she has stated that she knew Suraj, who got her employed in the factory of the petitioner and she had some monetary dues as such she asked the petitioner to pay her legitimate due on which petitioner asked her to come the next day and on the next day when she went to meet the petitioner for seeking her dues, the petitioner established physical relation.
3/4 Section 183 BNSS is true in that event the victim would have informed the informant about the occurrence but then that was not done rather she eloped with Dinesh to Rajasthan and even changed her name and was staying there when she was recovered.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the name of the victim is Bablee Akhtar and she changed her name to Puja and thereafter married Dinesh and was staying at Alwar, Rajasthan. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of the wedlock, two children were also born to the victim.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Panchrukhi (Sarai) P.S. Case No.305/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of
4/4 the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T