Patna High Court
Girja DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that bail, both regular and anticipatory, should not be granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered regular and anticipatory bail applications filed by three petitioners—Raja Kumar, Ravindra Kumar Paswan, and Girja Devi—in connection with a kidnapping case (PS Desari Case No. 200 of 2020) involving alleged offences under Sections 363, 365, 366(a) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that his 14‑year‑old daughter was abducted in August 2020 and has not been recovered, while the investigation linked the petitioners to the disappearance through statements of relatives and a CBI‑conducted polygraph test on Raja that was deemed deceptive. The petitioners argued they had clean antecedents and were unaware of the victim’s whereabouts, seeking bail on the basis that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences, the possibility of the accused influencing the investigation, and the unresolved status of the missing child. After evaluating the evidence and the risk to the investigation, the Court declined to grant either regular or anticipatory bail to any of the petitioners. Consequently, all bail applications were rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused in a kidnapping case involving a missing minor.
- Whether anticipatory bail is appropriate given the seriousness of the offences and the risk of tampering with evidence.
- Whether the conduct of the accused, including alleged deception in a polygraph test, warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 365, 366(a)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- kidnapping
- IPC
- child trafficking
- polygraph test
- investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63421 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2020 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Raja Kumar @ Raja Paswan S/o Late Gajendra Paswan R/o Village-
Taiyabpur Kharjamma, P.S.- Desari, District- Vaishali, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 63960 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2020 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ravindra Kumar Paswan S/o- Shankar Paswan Village- Ladma PS-Kahalgaon
Dist- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 76509 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2020 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Girja Devi W/o Late Laddu Lal Paswan R/o Village - Sultanpur, Post -
Sultanpur, P.S - Desari, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 63421 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Kanhaiya Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ajeet Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ram Krishna, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Surendra, Adv.
Mr. Kishore Thakur, Adv.
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 63960 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kailash Prasad Swarnkar, Adv.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
2/10
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 76509 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kailash Prasad Swarnkar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 08-05-2026 Cr. Misc. No.63421 of 2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Desari
P.S. Case No. 200 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 363, 365, 366(a) and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The Investigating Officer of the case, in compliance
of the order dated 03.04.2026, is present in the Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent and is in custody since 16.02.2025 and the informant
alleges that his minor daughter aged about 14 years was
kidnapped on 04.08.2020. It is submitted that FIR was instituted
against unknown. It is further submitted that during the course
of investigating, it transpired that the victim was in love with the
petitioner, who had a sister namely Girija, who was a widow,
but then was living with one Ravindra in a relationship, who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
3/10
was employed with the CRPF at Jharkhand, further petitioner
and the victim eloped and petitioner brought her to the house of
Girija, where Ravindra was also present, it also transpired
during the course of investigation that daughter of Girija from
her first husband disclosed to her grand parent that Raja had
brought the victim to their house and thereafter petitioner along
with Ravindra have disappeared the victim.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner next submits
that during the course of investigation, it also transpired that
Girija had purchased a sim in her name and had given it to the
victim but then it is submitted that Girija never gave any mobile
to the victim but in order to connect her and Raja with the
offence, the said fact has come in the investigation. It is also
submitted that victim till date has not been recovered.
6. Learned APP Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner. The learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant submits that victim till date
has not been recovered and the FIR was against unknown,
which amply demonstrates that informant never had any
intention of implicating an innocent person. It is further
submitted that during course of investigation, based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
4/10
disclosure made by the daughter of Girija from her first husband
to her grand parent that victim had come to their house where
Ravindra was also present, this fact came to the fore that victim
had accompanied to the house of Raja at Bhagalpur and from
there she went missing. Learned APP Mr. Jharkhand Upadhyay,
based on instruction of the Investigating Officer, submits that
polygraphy test of Raja was conducted by the CBI and the
experts who conducted the polygraphy test in their opinion
disclosed that answers were deceptive, which amply
demonstrates that Raja (Petitioner) despite being aware of the
whereabouts of the victim is not coming forth with the truth.
Learned APP further submits that of late in the State of Bihar
minor victims in name of love are eloping and thereafter they
are made to indulge in prostitution as cases of Child Trafficking
has also increased. It is further submitted that charge sheet
against Raja has been submitted. It is next submitted that name
of Raja transpired in the case based on disclosure by her own
maternal niece i.e. daughter of Girija to her grand parent that
victim had accompanied Raja and thereafter the victim went
missing. It is also submitted that during course of investigation
Ravindra was also arrested and he in his confessional statement
before the police stated that Damodar Paswan said not to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
5/10
disclose about the occurrence to anyone and that he will ensure
that the issue is resolved.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
8 Accordingly, the regular bail application of the
petitioner is rejected.
Cr. Misc. No.76509 of 2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection
with Desari P.S. Case No. 200 of 2020 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 366(a) and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that his
minor daughter aged about 14 years was kidnapped on
04.08.2020.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR
was instituted against unknown. It is further submitted that
during course of investigating, it transpired that the victim was
in love with Raja, who is own brother of the present petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
6/10
and petitioner is a widow, but then was living with one Ravindra
in a relationship, who was employed with the CRPF at
Jharkhand, further Raja and the victim eloped and Raja brought
her to the house of Girija (petitioner), where Ravindra was also
present, it also transpired during the course of investigation that
daughter of Girija from her first husband disclosed to her grand
parents that Raja had brought the victim to their house and
thereafter Raja along with Ravindra have disappeared the
victim.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
since petitioner is own sister of Raja as such she came to be
implicated in the instant case through Divyanshi. It is also
submitted that police in order to make out a case during the
course of investigation has also recorded that Raja had
purchased the Sim in her name and had given the said Sim to
the victim. It is submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware of the said fact that any Sim in her name was
purchased by Raja and was given to the victim.
6. Learned APP Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes
the anticipatory bail of the petitioner. The learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant submits that FIR was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
7/10
against unknown as such informant was not aware that who
were involved in the occurrence of kidnapping of her daughter
but then during the course of investigation, based on the
disclosure made by the daughter of the petitioner to her grand
parents the occurrence unfolded, when it came to light that
victim and Raja were in love and they eloped and Raja brought
her to the house of petitioner at Bhagalpur, where she was
staying in a relationship with Ravindra and Raja and Ravindra
together disappeared the victim. It is also submitted that since
victim had gone to the house of the petitioner, as such petitioner
must be aware about the whereabouts of the victim, on which,
the learned APP submits that during the course of investigation
polygraphy test of Raja was conducted by the CBI and the
experts who conducted the polygraphy test in their opinion
disclosed that answers were deceptive. Learned APP further
submits that whether victim is alive or dead is also an issue to
be investigated. It is next submitted that of late in the State of
Bihar minor girls in name of love are eloping and thereafter they
are made to indulge in prostitution as cases of Child Trafficking
has also increased. It is next submitted that investigation against
the petitioner is continuing and interrogation is necessary for
arriving at the truth.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
8/10
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail
to the petitioner.
8 Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the
petitioner is rejected.
Cr. Misc. No.63960 of 2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Desari
P.S. Case No. 200 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 363, 365, 366(a) and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent and is in custody since 26.03.2025 and the informant
alleges that his minor daughter aged about 14 years was
kidnapped on 04.08.2020.
4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant submits that Raja Kumar @ Raja
Paswan had approached this court seeking regular bail by filing
Cr. Misc. No. 63421 of 2025 and Girija Devi had approached
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
9/10
this court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.
76509 of 2025 but both the applications got rejected by an order
dated 08.05.2026 after considering the case in detail and on
merits. It is also submitted that in sum and substance the
allegation is that the informant alleges that his minor daughter
aged about 14 years was kidnapped on 04.08.2020.
5. It is next submitted that FIR was instituted against
unknown and the child is still missing. It is further submitted
that name of this petitioner transpired based on disclosure made
by the daughter of Girija Devi to her grand parent that Raja had
brought the victim to their house at Bhagalpur, where Ravindra
(petitioner) was also present who was in a relationship with
Girija and Raja and Ravindra (petitioner) disappeared the
victim. It is also submitted that even petitioner in his
confessional statement disclosed that Damodar Paswan had
requested him not to disclose about the occurrence to anyone as
he will try to resolve the dispute as such it appears that Raja,
Girija and petitioner are aware of the whereabouts of the victim.
6. The learned APP at this stage submits that
polygraphy test of Raja was also conducted by the CBI but then
the experts opined that answers of Raja with regard to victim
was deceptive. It is reiterated and submitted that victim till date
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63421 of 2025(7) dt.08-05-2026
10/10
has not been recovered either the victim has been killed or has
been sold to some organization which indulges in child
trafficking hence it is not a fit case for grant of bail.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submissions of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and APP
that regular bail and anticipatory bail application of Raja and
Girija has been rejected, after considering the case on merits and
in detail.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
also taking into consideration the order dated 08.05.2026, in Cr.
Misc. No.63421 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No.76509 of 2025, the
Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
9. Accordingly, the regular bail application of the
petitioner is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…