Patna High Court
Raushan Kumar @ Rauran kumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, surety and statutory conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, based on an informant's allegation that he abducted the informant's minor daughter for marriage. The petitioner contended that the allegation was false, that the victim had voluntarily left home and later returned, and that her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code did not name him. The State and the informant opposed the bail but could not refute the victim’s statement. The Court examined whether the allegations, in view of the victim’s statement, justified denial of bail. It held that the petitioner could be released on anticipatory bail, subject to bond and surety conditions and the statutory safeguards under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNS Act. The order granted anticipatory bail for a period of six weeks, pending further proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
- Whether the allegations under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the BNS Act constitute a prima facie case against the petitioner.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC, which does not name the petitioner, negates the charge of abduction.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 3(5), 482(2), 96
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 164, 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- minor abduction
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Section 164 CrPC
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17428 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2025 Thana- BELDOUR District- Khagaria
======================================================
Raushan Kumar @ Rauran Kumar S/o Manohar Mahto R/o - Saraiya, P.S -
Chautham, District - Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nisha Devi w/o Arbind Mahto R/o Beldaur, Ward No.-09, Nagar Panchayat,
P.S.- Beldaur, Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Mohan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Prasad, A.P.P.
Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 96 and
3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case but
then the said case was also instituted from the side of the
informant. It is further submitted that in sum and substance, the
informant alleges that his minor daughter on 13.08.2025 at
02:00 p.m. had left the house on pretext of using the toilet but
did not return and on search it transpired that petitioner enticed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17428 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
the minor daughter of the informant and took her away with an
intent to marry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that no doubt, the petitioner
and the victim were known to each other and the victim on her
own volition had left the house but not with the petitioner. It is
next submitted that victim came back and her statement was
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has not named
the petitioner or any other person being involved in the
occurrence. It is, thus, submitted that merely knowing the victim
is not an offence.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but
then are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the victim in
her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not stated
anything against the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17428 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor
Court in connection with Beldaur P.S. Case No. 253 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.