Dipu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83549 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2025 Thana- PALIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Dipu Kumar Son of Birendra Singh R/o Village- Bahiro (Ara), P.S.- Nawada, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Paliganj P.S. Case No. 330 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2). 140(3), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the minor daughter of the informant has gone to the temple to offer prayers, but when she did not return for an hour, the informant came to know that one Vishal Rai had kidnapped her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83549 of 2025(4) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of the investigation, the victim was recovered, and her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS was recorded. In her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, she has stated that as she was annoyed with her parents, she went out of her house on the pretext of going to the temple and went to Bihta to her grandparents'. Her grandparents took her to Banaras and left her with Vishal Rai. Vishal Rai left at the station on the pretext that he would return after five minutes, but he did not return. She returned to Ara by train and was in the waiting room for two days without any food; there she met the petitioner.
She further states that they have solemnized marriage in a temple, and they are happily married. The victim has further stated that she has solemnized marriage of her own will. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner that he has enticed or forced the victim. He further submits that a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 06.09.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83549 of 2025(4) dt.27-01-2026 3/3 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 S.D.J.M., Danapur, Patna in connection with Paliganj P.S. Case No. 330 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T