Golu Kumar @ Ramesh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89237 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2024 Thana- TARIYANI CHOWK District- Sheohar ====================================================== Golu Kumar @ Ramesh S/O Manohar Mandal Resident of village-Govind Pitaujhiya, P.S-Mahindwar, District-Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

X, R/o Chatauni PS- Tariani Dist- Sheohar, PIN- 843329 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saptashwa Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP For the Informant :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary. None appears on behalf of the informant despite notice being validly served.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Tariyani P.S. Case No. 142 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 137, 96, 3(5) of the BNS.

3. Allegation against the accused is of luring away the informant's daughter with malicious intentions.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89237 of 2024(4) dt.08-05-2025 2/3 present case. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of about ten days in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel further submitted that, as a matter of fact, victim left her house on her own sweet will and this petitioner never pressurized her or threatened her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has supported the case of the prosecution and specifically stated that this petitioner allured her to solemnize marriage, and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to the released on bail. Learned APP further added that police after investigation submitted charge-sheet under Sections 137, 96, 64, 3(5) of the BNS, 4/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 9/10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, charge-sheet as also Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89237 of 2024(4) dt.08-05-2025 3/3

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

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T