Patna High Court
Arjun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 480(3) of the BNSS, subject to the stipulated bond and conditions.
Summary
Arjun Kumar applied for bail in a case originally registered under Section 366 of the IPC, later amended to include Section 376 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The victim, initially reported as 18 years old, was later medically assessed to be 23, indicating she was not a minor and POCSO provisions were inapplicable. The petitioner contended that the victim voluntarily left her parental home, married him, and that there was no coercion or force, asserting that the matter was compromised between the parties. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court, noting the victim’s adult status, the voluntary nature of her actions, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the filing of a charge‑sheet, applied Section 480(3) of the BNSS and granted bail with a bond and conditions. The bail order required a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and compliance with attendance and conduct conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the charges under Sections 366 IPC, 376 IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act
- Whether Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act are applicable given the victim’s age
- Whether the voluntary nature of the victim’s actions and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify bail under Section 480(3) of the BNSS
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 366, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- IPC 366
- IPC 376
- POCSO Act
- adult victim
- voluntary marriage
- non‑bailable offence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1453 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2023 Thana- MOUZAHIDPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Arjun Kumar S/O Rohit Tanti Resident of Village -Rasalpur, Police Station-
Rajaun,Dist- Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/O Late Shankar Tanti R/O Mohalla- Kutubganj,P.S- Babarganj,Dist-
Bhagalpur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the occurrence is of dated 13.05.2023 and even the
informant has stated that the victim girl was aged about 18 years
and the FIR was initially registered under Section 366 IPC.
Subsequently, Section 376 IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the
POCSO Act were inserted and cognizance has been taken under
these provisions. However, when the deposition of the victim
girl was being recorded by the court concerned, her age was
assessed to be 23 years on 04.11.2025. These facts clearly show
that the victim was not minor and there could be no application
of Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. In these circumstances,
learned counsel submits that there is no need to issue notice to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1453 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
the informant.
02. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
03. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Mozahidpur (Babarganj) P.S. Case No. 187 of
2023 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 366 of
the Indian Penal Code and later on added Section 376 of IPC
and 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.
04. As per prosecution case, the 18 years old daughter
of the informant went to collect her result of Intermediate but
did not return to her house. She took with herself Rs. 2,00,000/-
in cash, some ornaments and her educational documents of
Class-10 and 12. The name of the petitioner transpired during
investigation for being instrumental in the missing of the
daughter of the informant.
05. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. The petitioner has not been named in the FIR. From the
FIR, it is clear that the daughter of the informant voluntarily left
her house and she was a major girl. The victim girl solemnized
marriage with the petitioner and in her statement recorded under
Section 183 BNSS, she stated these facts. There was no force or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1453 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
coercion against the victim girl. The matter has also been
compromised between the parties and the victim girl has been
residing in her matrimonial house happily. The deposition of the
victim girl has also been recorded wherein she stated that she
left her house on her own and solemnized marriage with the
petitioner and started living with him in his house. The
petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since
07.02.2025. Charge-sheet has been submitted.
06. Learned APP for the State opposes the submission
made on behalf of the petitioner.
07. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
voluntary nature of act of the victim and her age at which a girl
develops sufficient maturity and further considering the period
of custody of the petitioner and his clean antecedent along with
submission of charge-sheet, the petitioner above named is
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act, Bhagalpur/court
concerned in connection with Mozahidpur (Babarganj) P.S. Case
No. 187 of 2023, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1453 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
480(3) of BNSS and the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of
the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioner will be liable to be
cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…