Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ramnath MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, finding no sufficient ground to refuse it.

Summary

The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramnath Mukhiya, who was charged under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act for allegedly abducting the daughter‑in‑law of an informant. The prosecution alleged abduction, while the petitioner contended that the victim voluntarily went with him and stayed at his house, as recorded in her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, and that no overt act of kidnapping was proved. The petitioner also highlighted his clean record and that he had been in judicial custody since 19‑09‑2025. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. After hearing both sides, the Court found the material insufficient to deny bail and ordered the petitioner to be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the allegations under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNSS and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act constitute a prima facie case justifying denial of bail.
  • Whether the victim's statement under Section 183 of the BNSS negates the charge of abduction.
  • Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk or danger to the community warranting custody.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • abduction
  • POCSO Act
  • BNSS
  • Section 183
  • Section 137(2)
  • Section 96
  • Section 8
  • Section 12
  • Patna High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11515 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2025 Thana- MAHISHI District- Saharsa
                 ======================================================
                 Ramnath Mukhiya S/o Natoo Mukhiya @ Natu Mukhiya R/o vill -
                 Bhatrandha, P.S.- Ghailore, Distt.- Madhepura, Bihar



                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XXX S/o YYY Na



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Mahishi P.S. Case No. 309 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Section 137(2), 96 of the B.N.S.,

                   2023 and Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner has abducted daughter-in-law of the informant.

                                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.11515 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
                                            2/3




          case. He also submits that during the course of investigation,

          the victim has given her statement recorded under Section 183

          of the BNSS, wherein she has stated that she had some quarrel

          with her husband, due to which she went out of the house. In

          this way, she met the petitioner, who told her to drop at her

          maika. As she boarded on bike, he took her to his house and left

          her with his wife. She has further stated that while she was at

          the house of petitioner, he was not there. He further submits that

          the only allegation against the petitioner is that he took the

          victim to his house. No other overt act is alleged against the

          petitioner and the victim is a major. Moreover, 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 19.09.2025.

                       5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

          for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          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 Special
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11515 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Court, POCSO, Saharsa in connection with Mahishi P.S. Case

                     No. 309 of 2025.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.