Ganesh Mahto @ Ganesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75556 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2025 Thana- KANGLI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Ganesh Mahto @ Ganesh Kumar S/O Lalan Mahto R/O Village- Sugaha Bhawanipur, P.S- Kangali, District- West Champaran (Bettiah). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XXXX S/O Kishun Mahto R/O Village- Sugaha Bhawanipur, P.S- Kangali, Distt.- West Champaran (Bettiah).

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-11-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, Mr. Sanjay Kumar.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kangli P.S. Case No. 83 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 96 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his minor daughter aged about 14 years was kidnapped by Ganesh on 17.06.2025 with an intent to marry, accordingly, he went to the house of Ganesh when his family

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75556 of 2025(2) dt.20-11-2025 2/3 members refused to return the victim.

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 victim and the petitioner were in love. It is also submitted that the victim has come back and she was found accompanying her aunt. It is also submitted that police, during the course of investigation, asked the aunt of the victim that how come she is with the victim on which she replied that coincidentally they met at railway station.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that victim is aged in between 14-15 years and is a minor and is not capable of understanding the consequences of her action. It is also submitted that after recovery the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 BNSS wherein she supported the case of the prosecution and also stated that she was confined by the petitioner and he committed wrong with her. The learned APP submits that investigation of the case is in its nascent stages.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75556 of 2025(2) dt.20-11-2025 3/3 APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T