Patna High CourtCR. MISC./8466/2025bail rejected

Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Thakur @ Niraj Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-14Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8466 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2024 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Thakur @ Niraj Thakur S/o Shri Bhagwan Thakur R/o Village- Harnahiyan, P.S.- Purhania, District- Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Navin Kumar S/o Late Ramsharnagat Singh R/o Vill.- Gay Ghat Ward No.- 1, P.S.- Rumni Saidpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Ms.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajiv Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 177 of 2024 dt. 29.05.2024 registered for the offence u/s 363, 366-A, 34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the F.I.R. on 28.05.2024 at 06:00 A.M. the minor daughter of the informant aged about 13 years had gone to take examination in the campus of Ram Don High School but she did not return after dispersal. The informant searched her daughter at bus station and railway station but she could not be traced. In the meantime the informant received calls from mobile nos. 6205341724 & 6201461156 and he was informed that his daughter has been kidnapped and the caller disclosed his name

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8466 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 2/3 as Neeraj Thakur (i.e. petitioner). The informant has raised suspicion that petitioner along with his whole family has kidnapped his daughter and would kill her for her organs.

4. Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. He submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it is clear that daughter of the informant allegedly left the house on 28.05.2024 for appearing in examination but the informant has also alleged that she was carrying mobile of her grandmother with her which is very strange as no mobile phones are allowed in schools or examination centres. Nowhere in the F.I.R. the informant has alleged that the victim was either forcibly taken away, enticed or induced by the petitioner in any manner. He next submits that even though the daughter of the informant went missing on 28.05.2024 but the F.I.R. was instituted on 29.05.2024 and the same was sent to court on 30.05.2024. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties, taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R. , the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case and has made direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8466 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 3/3 narrated the occurrence in detail and the victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T