Patna High Court
Praduman Kumar Basak @ Pradeep Kumar @ Praduman Kumar BosakversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioners, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioners, Praduman Kumar Basak and Niraj Kumar Basak, were charged under Sections 363, 366 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly abducting a woman and her minor daughter. The prosecution’s case is based on the informant’s claim that the petitioners kidnapped the victim, while the victim’s statements under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC are contradictory – one indicating enticement and the other forceful kidnapping. The petitioners argued that they are innocent, that the FIR was lodged sixteen days after the alleged incident without explanation, and that they have no prior criminal record, having been in judicial custody since 23 September 2025. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, directing the petitioners to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge‑I, Kishanganj.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate decision on the bail application for the accused under Sections 363, 366 and 34 IPC given the contradictory victim statements and delay in filing the FIR?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- IPC
- CrPC
- contradictory statements
- delay in FIR
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91398 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-440 Year-2020 Thana- KISHANGANJ District- Kishanganj
======================================================
1. Praduman Kumar Basak @ Pradeep Kumar @ Praduman Kumar Bosak S/O
Mannu Lal Bosak Resident of Village- Tola Baigana, Police Station-
Terhagachh, District- Kishanganj.
2. Niraj Kumar Basak @ Nirja Kumar Basak S/O Gunit Lal Bosak @ Kanhiya
Lal Basak Resident of Village- Tola Baigana, Police Station- Terhagachh,
District- Kishanganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 26-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection
with Sessions Trial No. 335 of 2025 arising out of Kishanganj
P.S. Case No. 440 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 363, 366 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the wife
of the informant has gone to the bank with her minor daughter.
When she did not return, the informant started searching for her,
and he came to know that the petitioner, along with others, had
abducted her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91398 of 2025(3) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this
case. He also submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that
the date of occurrence is 05.11.2020, whereas the FIR was lodged
on 21.11.2020 after the passage of sixteen days, and the delay has
not been explained. He further submits that during the course of
the investigation, the victim was recovered, and she has given her
statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. In
her statement under section 161 of the Cr.P.C., she has stated that
she was enticed by the petitioner and others, whereas in her
statement u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., she has stated that she was
forcefully kidnapped. Her hands and legs were tied. From perusal
of the statement u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., it is clear that she had
returned after five days, whereas the FIR was lodged after sixteen
days of the occurrence. He further submits that the versions of the
victim u/s 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. are contradictory. Moreover,
a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that
petitioners have no criminal antecedent and they are languishing
in judicial custody since 23.09.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91398 of 2025(3) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named
petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Kishanganj in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 335 of 2025 arising out of Kishanganj P.S. Case
No. 440 of 2020.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…