Allowed

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitish Ray v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC16 Jan 2025CR. MISC./54706/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a kidnapping-for-marriage case involving a minor girl under Sections 365, 366(A) IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. Considering custody since June 2024 and filing of charge sheet, the court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing Rs.10,000 bond with two like sureties, one bailor being a family member, subject to attendance at trial.

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitish Ray Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54706 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-319 Year-2023 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitish Ray Son of Pramod Ray R/O Vill.- Champapur Koraiya Tola, P.s.- Chiraiya, Dist.- East Champaran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Kajal Kumari Daughter of Mukesh Ray R/O Vill.- Jaypal Tola, P.s.Chiraiya, Dist.- East Champaran. At Present R/at Vill.- Champapur Koraiya Toal, P.s.- Chiraiya, Dist.- East Champaran.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 16-01-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

¶14

for the State as also learned counsel for the Informant. Perused the case diary.

¶15

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 319 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 365, 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶16

3. As per the prosecution case, accused persons came at the door of the informant and kidnapped his minor daughter for the purpose of marriage.

¶17

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54706 of 2024(4) dt.16-01-2025 2/3

¶19

that the petitioner is in custody since 24-06-2024. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

¶20

5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that there is delay of two days in lodging of the FIR. It is next submitted that victim girl was never kidnapped rather in her statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of the Cr.P.C., she has stated that she was not kidnapped and she went with the petitioner at her own volition and solemnized marriage with the petitioner. It is further submitted that victim is residing in her matrimonial house. It is submitted that medical report also does not suggests any marks of injury. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶21

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that age of the victim is between 16-17 years, as emanated in medical report. Other witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

¶22

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and charge sheet being submitted, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54706 of 2024(4) dt.16-01-2025 3/3

¶24

petitioner.

¶25

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 319 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:

¶26

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

¶27

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶28

Raj Kishore/- U T

¶29

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitish Ray v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitish Ray v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Belmanti Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Altaf Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Kumar @ Khesari Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Sujeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar