Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83193 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar, S/O Rajeshwar Paswan @ Batalu Paswan, R/O Vill.-Kataha, P.S- Mehsi, Dist-East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sunita Devi, W/O Dinesh Sahni, R/O Vill.-Kataha, P.S- Mehsi, Dist-East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Adarsh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2025 Heard Mr. Adarsh Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Md. Matloob Rab, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No.71 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant's minor daughter aged about 15 years left her house for attendding nature's call but she did not return. In course of search, the informant came to know that the petitioner and other persons named in the F.I.R. have kidnapped the minor daughter for marriage with this petitioner.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83193 of 2024(4) dt.17-02-2025 2/2 offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. During course of investigation, the victim was recovered and she has given her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that she has gone to Delhi with the petitioner and that they have solemnized marriage. She has not stated that she was kidnapped by the petitioner rather she has stated that she has gone as her mother used to scold her. It is a case of elopment. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is languishing in judicial custody since 05.10.2024.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIIth-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Motihari in connection with Mehsi.P.S. Case No.71 of 2024. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T