IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38889 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2025 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Rohit Kumar S/O Brahmdeo Prasad Mandal Resident of Village- Babu Tola, P.S.- Banka, District-Banka ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 28-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Alouli P.S. case No. 569 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Prosecution case, in short, is that all accused persons named in the F.I.R., including the petitioner, abducted the daughter of the informant, who is aged about 12 years, at gunpoint. The victim called informant on her mobile phone stating that accused persons were abducting her and assaulting her. She also called her elder sister stating the same and requested to be rescued. It is alleged that ten days prior to the alleged occurrence, family of the informant had rescued their niece Tannu from the accused persons, due to which they had allegedly threatened with dire consequences. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38889 of 2026(3) dt.28-07-2026 2/2 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner is owner/driver of the alleged seized scorpio vehicle. The Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 26.04.2026 and has no criminal antecedent. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the fact that petitioner is the owner of the vehicle from which the victim had been abducted, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected. manish/- (Alok Kumar, J) U T