Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner at this stage of the proceedings.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 483, 484, 137(2), 142, 98 and 99 of the B.N.S., 2023, alleging that the minor victim had voluntarily left her home and was with him. The prosecution presented the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S., indicating that she was taken by the petitioner and subsequently passed through several hands, culminating in her being left in Khagaria, which the State characterized as human trafficking. The petitioner argued that the victim's lack of alarm during the journey showed consent. The court examined the victim's detailed testimony, found it indicative of forced movement and trafficking, and concluded that the seriousness of the allegations outweighed the bail request. Consequently, the court refused bail, allowing the petitioner to re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite allegations of human trafficking and kidnapping under the cited sections of the B.N.S.
- Whether the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 establish a prima facie case of forced trafficking sufficient to deny bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 137(2), 142, 180, 183, 483, 484, 98, 99
Subjects
- bail
- human trafficking
- kidnapping
- Sections 483
- Sections 484
- Section 137(2)
- Section 142
- Section 98
- Section 99
- Section 180
- Section 183
- trial expeditious
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1230 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-454 Year-2025 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/o- Dinesh Yadav Resident of Village-Lakshmipur Lahuar,
Post office- Rajgir, Police station- Rajgir, District- Nalanda Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Munni Devi W/O - Ramashish Yadav,R/O Village-Pokharpar, Lahuar, P.S.-
Rajgir, Dist.-Nalanda
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aklavya Chandan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 483, 484
and 137(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and further added Sections 142,
98 & 99 of the B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
minor daughter of the informant has gone out of the house of the
informant and the informant started searching.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
during course of investigation the victim was recovered and she
has given her statement under Sections 180 & 183 of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1230 of 2026(4) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
In her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS the victim has
stated that she was having affair outside marriage with one
Rahul Kumar (the petitioner). He forcefully took her to the
baandh. One Dharmendra Kumar was called there. Dharmendra
Kumar brought a four wheeler and both petitioner and
Dharmendra have forcefully boarded her in that four wheeler.
After that the petitioner left the four wheeler. Dharmendra
Kumar took her to Rajgir railway station and he parked his
vehicle at Rajgir railway station and took her in a train and he
handed over to one Ranjeet. Ultimately, she has stated that one
lady has handed her over to Md. Babar and Md. Babar after
having her for five days, handed her over to one Chhotu, and
Chhotu left her in Khagaria. Similar kind of statement has been
given by the victim under Section 180 of the BNSS.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that she herself has gone
out of her house and that she has not raised alarm during her
entire journey. This shows that she has willingly been with the
petitioner.
6. Countering this learned APP for the State has
submitted that from perusal of the statement of the victim, under
Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS it is clear that the victim has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1230 of 2026(4) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
been transferred to many hands, initially by the petitioner and
ultimately by Md. Babar to one Chhotu who has left her to
Khagaria. It is a clear cut case of human trafficking.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at
this stage, however, he may renew his prayer for bail after six
months if the trial is not concluded. Learned trial court is
directed to expedite the trial.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…