Rahul Pasi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79194 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2025 Thana- LAKHNAUR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Rahul Pasi S/o Shambhu Pasi Resident of village- Laufa Pasi Tola, P.S.- Lakhnour, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Videshi Pasi S/o Late Faudar Pasi R/o vill - Loupha Pasi Tola, ward no. 7, P.S.- Lakhnour, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate :

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

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 Heard Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 16.07.2025, in connection with Lakhnaur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2025 corresponding to POCSO No.148 of 2025 and G.R. No. 1368 of 2025, FIR dated 15.07.2025 registered for the offence under Sections 137(2), 96, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and 8,12 of POCSO Act.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that when the informant got information that his grand-daughter was abducted by the petitioner then he went to the house of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79194 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026 2/3 petitioner and on enquiry, found that the petitioner kidnapped her daughter with intention to marry her and when the informant asked his family members to return her daughter, then the accused persons ousted him from their door and abused him and threatened him also.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Infact the victim was in love with the petitioner and due to this reason the informant has falsely implicated the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 16.07.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim was recovered and her statement was recorded under Section 180 BNSS and 183 BNSS in which she has stated that the petitioner had kidnapped her and as per her date of birth she was minor on the date of occurrence.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case supported by statement of the victim, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Lakhnaur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2025 pending in the Court of Additional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79194 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026 3/3 Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Judge POCSO, Madhubani.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T