Patna High CourtCR. MISC./79410/2024bail rejected

Rakesh Thakur @ Rakesh Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-23Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79410 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2023 Thana- PUWAKHALI District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Rakesh Thakur @ Rakesh Kumar Thakur Son of Late Shankar Thakur village- Rasia Colony, Ps- Powakhali, dist- Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 366 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he kidnapped the daughter and maternal grand daughter of informant aged about 6 years who are still traceless till date.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. Petitioner is already married with Pawani Devi and had two sons from his marriage. Petitioner has no concern with Radha Devi/daughter of informant and has not performed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79410 of 2024(2) dt.23-01-2025 2/2 second marriage with Radha Devi. It is further submitted that the present case has been lodged after a delay 18 months and there is no plausible explanation for the same. Petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2024.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific accusation against this petitioner that he abducted the daughter and maternal grand daughter of informant and performed marriage with daughter of informant on 02.03.2022 in a temple. It has also been reported in para 37 of the case diary that this petitioner was in telephonic contact with Radha Devi on 02.03.2022 after which the mobile phones of both of them went switched off.

5. Considering the accusation and the fact that victims are still traceless, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T