Patna High Court

Parvati DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioners, Parvati Devi and Tuntun Ram, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that they were involved in the kidnapping of an informant's sister‑in‑law, who later, in a statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., denied any kidnapping and said she had fled with her lover, Ranjeet Kumar. The petitioners argued they were falsely implicated because they are parents of the co‑accused and have clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. Considering the victim’s statement, the petitioners’ clean record, and the circumstances, the court allowed anticipatory bail subject to bail‑bond and sureties under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case alleging kidnapping under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the B.N.S.
Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. and the petitioners’ clean antecedents justify the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 87
B.N.S.S. — s. 183, 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
kidnapping
false implication
victim statement
clean antecedents
Section 482
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8678 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2025 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
           1.     Parvati Devi W/O Tuntun Ram R/O Village- Bakaur, P.S- Islampur, Distt.-
                  Nalanda.
           2.    Tuntun Ram S/O Raghunandan Ram R/O Village- Bakaur, P.S- Islampur,
                 Distt.- Nalanda.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Dharmnath Prasad S/O Late Chhathu Prasad R/O Saifpur, East of Pillar No.
                 6, P.S- Ganga Bridge, Hajipur, Distt.- Vaishali.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioners     :       Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   22-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2) and

                   87 of the B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on

                   04.11.2025, sister-in-law of informant went to market but did

                   not return. Upon search, informant came to know that all the

                   F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners, have

                   kidnapped his sister-in-law.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8678 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
                                            2/3




          behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and

          have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, there was love

          affair between co-accused Ranjeet Kumar and sister-in-law of

          the informant and petitioners have falsely been implicated in

          this case merely because they happen to be parent of co-accused

          Ranjeet Kumar. During investigation, the victim was recovered

          and in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S., she has denied the factum of kidnapping and has

          categorically stated that she was in love with co-accused

          Ranjeet Kumar and out of her own sweet will, she fled away

          with him because her parents wanted to get her married

          somewhere else. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioners.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S. and clean antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for

          grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.

                       7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8678 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like

                       amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class,

                       Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case

                       No. 180 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under

                       Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…