Furkan @ Md Furkan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82029 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2025 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Furkan @ Md Furkan Son of Late Jubair Resident of Village - Ramnagar, P.S. - Amour, District - Purnea ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Musfir Son of Rakib Resident of Village - Ramnagar, Ward No. - 8, P.S. - Amour, District - Purnea.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State:

Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP For the Opposite Party No.2:

Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 27-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 295 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 137(2), 87, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused person kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant on a Motorcycle by enticing her.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that no witness has supported the accusation against the petitioner. Earlier, vide order dated 23.12.2025, case diary as well as statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 183 BNSS was called for. In her statement under Section 183 BNSS,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82029 of 2025(6) dt.27-04-2026 2/2 the victim has not alleged any physical assault against the petitioner or any misbehaviour meted out to her by the petitioner. Drawing the attention of this Court to the evidence of the victim, who has been examined as PW 1 in course of trial and has claimed herself to be aged about 18 years, it has been submitted that the victim has deposed in her examination-inchief that this petitioner has done nothing wrong with her and she had identified the petitioner in the court. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 14.07.2025 and has got no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Perused the records and heard the parties. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Purnea, in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 295 of 2025.

(Praveen Kumar, J) Pawan/- U T