Vikash Kumar @ Naga v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80446 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Vikash Kumar @ Naga Son of Late Rajendra Yadav R/O English Ward No 4, P.S. and Dist.- Lakhisarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Rajnish Chandra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 366 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 366A, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Accusation against the petitioner is that he abducted the minor daughter of the informant with intention to marry her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of two days in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel further submitted that victim is major and there was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80446 of 2024(3) dt.17-02-2025 2/2 love affair between the victim and the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2024 and has two criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., victim has specifically stated that this petitioner forced her to marry against her will. Learned APP further submitted that police after investigation submitted charge-sheet under Sections 366A, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 6 of the POCSO Act.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim girl, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T