Patna High Court
Nardeo Kumar Sao @ Indradeo Sao @ Nardeo KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSUL
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner with conditions, holding that the circumstances do not warrant continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Nardeo Kumar Sao, was arrested in connection with a POCSO case alleging that he kidnapped a 13‑year‑old girl, entered into a false marriage, had sexual intercourse and caused pregnancy. The prosecution’s case is based on sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual, the parties are of similar age, and the FIR was lodged by the girl’s family rather than the girl herself, who did not allege coercion in her Section 164 statement. The court examined precedents highlighting misuse of POCSO provisions in adolescent ‘Romeo‑Juliet’ situations, including the Supreme Court’s observations in State of UP v. Anurudh and the Delhi and Gujarat High Court decisions. Finding that continued incarceration would not serve justice, the court granted regular bail subject to strict conditions, emphasizing that the order is prima facie and does not prejudice the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a POCSO case where the accused and the victim are of similar age and the alleged relationship is consensual.
- Whether the gravity of offences under the POCSO Act precludes bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 3(5), 65(1), 89
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- adolescent relationship
- Romeo‑Juliet clause
- age proximity
- criminal procedure
- regular bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12895 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2025 Thana- Mission District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Nardeo Kumar Sao @ Indradeo Sao @ Nardeo Kumar S/o Doresh Sao @
Daresh Sah @ Daresh Sao R/o vill - Kurla, P.s.- Gidhaur, Distt.- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o Y R/o vill - Nashibchal, P.S.- Mission, Distt.- Sheikhpura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL ORDER
4 27-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
POCSO Case No. 62 of 2025, arising out of Mission P.S. Case
No. 11 of 2025, registered under Sections 65(1), 89 and 3(5) of
the B.N.S., 2023 and sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
3. As per prosecution case, allegation is that the
petitioner kidnapped the 13 years old daughter of the informant
and took her away to Kurla and on the pretext of false marriage,
he made physical relationship and made her pregnant. The
informant side has been noticed and counsel is also appearing
on their behalf.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12895 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
2/5
present case. Petitioner is aged about 20 years. There were a
relationship with the girl and apparently the girl was made to
abort also. Petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody
since 07.07.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering that the applicant stands accused of
offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012, this Court has carefully examined the material on
record before proceeding to consider the question of bail,
mindful of the gravity that ordinarily attaches to offences under
the POCSO Act. However, the facts of the present case disclose
a situation that has come to be recognised in judicial discourse
as distinct from cases of predatory sexual offences against
children. The prosecutrix and the applicant are broadly of the
same age group. The statement of the prosecutrix recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. indicates that the relationship was one
of mutual acquaintance and the allegation of force or coercion is
not borne out from her own statement. The First Information
Report has been lodged not by the prosecutrix herself but by her
family members, and the prosecutrix has not supported the
version of the complainant in material particulars.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12895 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
3/5
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in In 2026 SCC
Online SC 40 State of UP VS Anurudh and Anr has held that,
“The Delhi High Court in Sahil v. the State NCT of Delhi
reported in 2024 DHC 6100 the Court noted in para 11 of the
order that POCSO cases filed at the behest of a girl's family
objecting to romantic involvement with a young boy have
become common place and consequent thereto these young boys
languish in jails. Therein, reference is also made to an order of
the Gujarat High Court reported in 2018 SCC OnLine
Gujarat 1223, where the Court noted that considering the
closeness in age of the prosecutrix and the accused as also the
fact that she had left home of her own accord observed that the
application deserved consideration.
8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further, considering
the fact that repeated judicial notice has been taken of the
misuse of these laws, directed copy of the judgment be
circulated to the Secretary, Law, Government of India, to
consider initiation of steps as may be possible to curb this
menace inter alia, the introduction of a Romeo - Juliet clause
exempting genuine adolescent relationships from the stronghold
of this law; enacting a mechanism enabling the prosecution of
those persons who, by the use of these laws seeks to settle
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12895 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
4/5
scores etc.”
. This Court is of the considered view that keeping the
applicant incarcerated in the facts of the present case would not
serve the ends of justice. The applicant is accordingly enlarged
on bail subject to the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly
contact the prosecutrix or her family members;
(ii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court
on all dates of hearing without fail;
(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or
attempt to influence any witness;
(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any,
before the trial court; (v) Any violation of the above
conditions shall entitle the prosecution to apply for
cancellation of bail, this application is allowed.
9. Accordingly, let the petitioner above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge
(POCSO), Sheikhpura /concerned court below in connection
with POCSO Case No. 62 of 2025, arising out of Mission P.S.
Case No. 11 of 2025.
10. It is made clear that any observation made herein
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12895 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
5/5
is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Ansul, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.