Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Md. Parwez Alam @ Md. Parvej vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party on 1 April, 2026

                                                         2026:JHHC:9208


    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         B.A. No.1404 of 2026

    Md. Parwez Alam @ Md. Parvej, S/o Md. Zafir @ Jafir Alam, aged
    about 19 years, Resident of Village Reshamba, P.O. Padwa, P.S.
    Basantrai, District Godda, Jharkhand.
                                               ...       Petitioner
                                   Versus
    The State of Jharkhand                     ...       Opp. Party

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

    For the Petitioner       : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
    For the State            : Mr. S.K. Srivastava, Addl. P.P.

 Order No.04/Dated- 01.04.2026
    1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Basantrai P.S. Case No.82 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 96 r/w 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Godda.

3. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused persons had kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the statement of the minor girl, who is aged about 13 years, recorded by the S.D.J.M. under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 wherein she has categorically stated that there is no physical relation established with the victim by any of the accused persons. It is submitted that at para 31 of the case diary, the victim has denied for medical examination. It is also submitted that petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 26.10.2025. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail.

Page | 1 2026:JHHC:9208

5. On the other hand, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submitted that victim has supported the prosecution case of kidnapping. Hence, petitioner may not be extended privilege of bail.

6. Considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he has kidnapped the minor girl, aged about 13 years, from the custody of her lawful guardian and brought her to Purnia, where he was arrested along with the victim girl. Considering the seriousness of offence, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner at present which stands rejected.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Dated: 1st April, 2026 Sachin/ Uploaded on: 02/04/2026 Page | 2