Patna High Court
Pramila DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond and surety conditions, under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023.
Summary
Petitioners Pramila Devi and Gorakh Ray applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, based on an informant's allegation that they abducted a minor girl for immoral purposes. The petitioners contended they have clean records, are related to the alleged victim, and that the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 does not support the prosecution, also raising a dispute over the victim’s age. The State’s counsel and the informant opposed the bail but could not refute the claim that the victim had not corroborated the charges. The Court examined the submissions, noted the lack of substantive evidence and the possibility of false implication, and considered the conditions under Section 482(2). It ordered that, if arrested or surrendered within six weeks, the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate‑IV’s satisfaction.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances.
- Whether the allegations constitute a cognizable offence warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 undermines the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 137(2), 183, 3(5), 482(2), 96
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- minor victim
- kidnapping
- immoral purpose
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87933 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-449 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Pramila Devi W/o Nirsu Ray @ Surendra Ray R/o Vill- Harpur Tand, P.S.-
Mahua, Distt- Vaishali
2. Gorakh Ray @ Mukesh Ray @ Mukesh Kumar S/o Nina Ray R/o Vill-
Rasulpur, Mubarak, P.S.- Mahua, Distt- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rinki Devi W/o Raju Ray R/o Vill- Rasulpur, Mubarak, P.O.- Manworha,
P.S.- Mahua, Distt- Vaishali
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP
for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 96
and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are person with clean antecedent and petitioner no.1
is a woman and the informant alleges that on 31.03.2025 at
01:00 p.m., the accused persons including the petitioners came
on a car and Rajnish Kumar forcefully made her minor daughter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87933 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
sit in the car with the help of Mohan Rai, next alleges that
accused may sale her daughter for immoral purpose.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that petitioner no.1 is mother
of Rajnish Kumar and petitioner no.2 is uncle (Mausa) of
Rajnish Kumar and they came to be implicated only with a view
to coerce Rajnish Kumar into submission. It is also submitted
that Rajnish Kumar and the victim were in love and they eloped
and the victim had come back and her statement was recorded
under Section 183 B.N.S.S. wherein she has not supported the
case of the prosecution and has disclosed her age as 19 years
though the court has assessed her age to be 16 years. It is also
submitted that victim presently is staying at remand home as she
has refused to go to her parents’ home. It is further submitted
that whether victim is a minor or a major, that is an issue of
investigation but then the manner in which the entire family
members have been implicated is a matter of concern. It is next
submitted that no mother would assist her son in kidnapping a
victim for the purposes of marriage but then police in
mechanical manner investigates.
5. The learned APP for the State and the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87933 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the
anticipatory bail application but then are not in a position to
rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioners that victim has not supported the case of the
prosecution.
6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of
learned counsel for the petitioners, let petitioners, above named,
in the event of their arrest or surrender with a period of six
weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Vaishali, Hajipur in connection
with Mahua P.S. Case No.449 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…