Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84234 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2022 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav Son of Rajeshwar Yadav At present Resident of Village Tumkahi Road, P.S. Sevrahi, District Kushinagar (Uttar Pradesh) permanent Address Resident of Village- Motipur, Mahdubani, P.S.- Takraha, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Fulwanti Devi Wife of Baijnath Ram Resident of Village- Banshi Tola, P.S.- Dhanha, District- West Champaran.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Dhanha P. S. Case No. 298 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 370, 370(A), 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner along with others kidnapped minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage. During course of investigation, victim was recovered and in her statement, recorded under Section 164 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84234 of 2025(3) dt.17-03-2026 2/2 the Cr.P.C., she has supported the prosecution case and has stated that when she was returning from school, co-accused Mithilesh Kumar took her to a temple on motorcycle where this petitioner and others solemnized her marriage with one Vinay Sagwan.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. No role has been assigned to the petitioner in the entire F.I.R. and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that victim has named this petitioner as one of the persons who participated in the alleged offence and forcibly solemnized her marriage with one Vinay Sagwan.

6. In view of the gravity of offence and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T