Patna High Court
Badal Dikshit @ Amarjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Badal Dikshit, was arrested on charges of kidnapping his minor niece under Section 96 of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case is based on the FIR and the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., alleging the kidnapping. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, asserting that the victim was merely his student, there were no witnesses, and no medical report existed to confirm her age or the alleged offence. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the FIR and the victim’s statement as sufficient grounds to keep the petitioner in custody. Considering the allegations and the supporting statements, the Court refused to grant bail and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a kidnapping case where the FIR and victim's statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. support the allegations.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- false implication
- victim statement
- Section 96
- Section 183
- criminal procedure
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76913 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2025 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Badal Dikshit @ Amarjeet Kumar S/o Rajendra Dikshit @ Rajanrda Ravindas
@ Rajendra Das @ Rajendra Ravidas R/o Village- Chano, Ward No. 4, P.S.-
Rasulpur, District- Bhagalpur (In FIR address wrongly mentioned as Village-
Karwasin, P.S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
6 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 96 of the B.N.S..
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant
alleged that the petitioner kidnapped his minor niece.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in a case of
kidnapping the victim, who was merely a student of the
petitioner. There is no witness to the said offence of
kidnapping. Even in the statement of the victim girl under
Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has only stated about an
attempt to outrage her modesty but the victim was saved.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76913 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
Further, there is no medical examination report of the victim on
record in order to establish her age etc. The petitioner is in
custody since 10.04.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of
bail on the ground that there is direct allegation in the First
Information Report which is supported by the statement of the
victim under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the fact that there are
allegations in the First Information Report against the
petitioner supported by the victim’s statement under Section
183 of the B.N.S.S., this Court is not inclined to grant the
privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for
bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection with
Sahar P.S. Case No.65 of 2025.
7. However, learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
anand/-
U T
Checking your session…