Patna High Court - Orders
Ravindra Kumar Paswan vs The State Of Bihar on 8 May, 2026
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
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 08-05-2026Cr. 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