Patna High Court
Sukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted in the present circumstances due to the seriousness of the offences and the ongoing investigation.
Summary
The petitioner, Sukesh Kumar, was charged under Sections 364 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly kidnapping and committing an offence in common intention, following his first marriage to a victim who later went missing. The FIR indicates that after marrying the victim, he entered into a second marriage with a co-accused, Reena Devi, and the victim remains untraceable, with only a skeleton recovered and DNA analysis pending. The petitioner applied for regular bail, claiming innocence and alleging that the case was filed 17 days after the incident based merely on suspicion. The State opposed bail, stating that the investigation is ongoing and efforts are being made to locate the victim. The court, considering the seriousness of the allegations, the missing victim, and the ongoing investigation, declined to grant bail.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted in a kidnapping and common intention case where the victim is missing and investigation is ongoing
- Whether mere suspicion and delay in filing the FIR justify denial of bail
- Whether the seriousness of the offences under Sections 364 and 34 of the IPC preclude bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 364
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- IPC Section 364
- IPC Section 34
- missing victim
- investigation
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49279 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2024 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Sukesh Kumar S/O Baudhu Singh R/O Village- Kaithi, P.S- Chautham, Distt.-
Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Viveka Nandsingh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyaya, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 07-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf of
the petitioner for the offences alleged under Section 364/34 of
the of the IPC, registered in connection with Chautham
P.S.Case No. 110/2024.
3. The FIR itself shows that the petitioner after
solemnization of his first marriage with the victim, has
solemnized his second marriage with the co-accused Reena
Devi. The victim is still traceless.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated
merely on the basis of suspicion. It is submitted further that the
present case was lodged after 17 days of the occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49279 of 2025(6) dt.07-01-2026
2/2
5. On the other hand, Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyaya, the
learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. He
submitted that the investigation is still continuing.
6. The I.O. was directed by the coordinate Bench to
take every effort for recovery of the victim girl. The
Superintendent of Police, Khagaria was also directed to assist
this Court. The Superintendent of Police, Khagaria informed the
coordinate Bench through video conferencing that efforts are
being made to ascertain the victim’s location and one skeleton
was recovered and the DNA profiling report is in progress.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and in view of the allegation against the petitioner, this Court is
not inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of bail, which is
hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
HR/-
U T
Checking your session…