Patna High Court
Vinayak Kumar @ Vinayak YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed as not maintainable because the petitioner is an absconder and Section 84 proceedings are pending.
Summary
Vinayak Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory (pre‑arrest) bail, fearing arrest in a case involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The State and the second opposite party contended that the petitioner had been declared an absconder and that proceedings under Section 84 of the BNYS were underway to secure his appearance. Relying on precedents such as Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi) and State of MP v. Pradeep Sharma, the court examined whether an absconder can be granted anticipatory bail. The bench held that the petition was not maintainable because the existence of Section 84 proceedings precludes the grant of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for pre‑arrest bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted to a person declared an absconder with Section 84 proceedings pending?
- Is a petition for pre‑arrest bail maintainable under such circumstances?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352, 75, 79
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- absconder
- Section 84
- pre‑arrest bail
- criminal procedure
- BNYS
- POCSO
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.161 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2025 Thana- MARAUNA District- Supaul
======================================================
Vinayak Kumar @ Vinayak Yadav S/O Shivanand Yadav R/O Village-
Kushmaul, Ward No. 7, P.S- Maurana, District- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XX D/O Raja Ram Yadav, W/O Rajesh Yadav R/O Village- Kushmaul, Ward
No. 7, P.S- Marauna, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Mr. P.K. Jha,
Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocates
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, A.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Manish Kumar No. 13, Mr. Rohit Kumar,
Ms. Shreya, Advocates
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, opposite
party no. 2 and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in case registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 75, 79,
352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 8 and 12
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the opposite party
no. 2 submitted that petitioner has been declared absconder and
process of Section 84 of the BNSS. has been initiated against
him to ensure his appearance in the Court as such petitioner is
not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail (Lavesh v. State
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.161 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/2
(NCT of Delhi) (2012) 8 SCC 730, State of MP v. Pradeep
Sharma (2014) 2 SCC 17, Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of
Bihar 2021 SCC OnLine SC 955).
4. Considering the aforesaid development, petition for
pre-arrest bail of petitioner is dismissed as not maintainable.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…