Patna High Court
Ashutosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bail bond with sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashutosh Kumar, applied for bail in a case registered as Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021, alleging offences under Sections 363 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code for kidnapping a minor. The prosecution contended that the petitioner abducted the informant’s minor daughter, while the defence argued that the petitioner had married the alleged victim, who was 18 at the time, and that the FIR was filed eight months after the alleged incident, indicating a delay. The victim’s testimony suggested a consensual marriage and that she had eloped with the petitioner, further claiming she had a child out of wedlock. The court noted the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and the advanced stage of trial, and considered the delay in filing the FIR. After hearing both sides, the court decided to grant bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties. The order was pronounced by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a kidnapping case under IPC 363 and 366(A) given the nature of the offences.
- Whether the delay of eight months in filing the FIR affects the merit of the bail application.
- Whether the alleged consensual marriage and the victim’s statements negate the elements of kidnapping.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- IPC 363
- IPC 366A
- delay in FIR
- consensual marriage
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12562 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2021 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Ashutosh Kumar S/o Chandeshwar Singh Resident of Village- Bakhari, P.S.-
Patahi, District - East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX S/o Y R/o Village - Gadha Dhanusi Ward No. 3, P.S - Runnisaidpur,
District - Sitamarhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A) of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner has kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12562 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
this case, the trial is in advanced stage, and even the victim has
been examined in the learned trial court as PW-1. He further
submits that the victim has stated categorically in her deposition
that as she has solemnized marriage with the petitioner, her
father has filed this case. She has also stated that her age was 18
years at the time of marriage. It has also been stated by the
victim in her cross-examination that she is also having a girl
child out of wedlock who is aged about four years. He also
submits that from perusal of the FIR, it will transpire that the
date of occurrence is 02.03.2020, whereas the FIR was filed on
14.01.2021. There is a delay of eight months in filing this case,
but the delay is not explained. He further submits that the victim
herself has eloped with the petitioner, and they are living a
happy married life. Moreover, a statement has been made in
para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent
and he is languishing in judicial custody since 24.10.2025.
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
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12562 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge-IV-cum-Special Judge
(Rape and POCSO), Sitamarhi in connection with Runni
Saidpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021 corresponding to Tr. No. 411
of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…