Patna High Court
Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Gupta @ ChhotuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner, holding that the allegations of force and coercion merit denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Kumar, was arrested in connection with a kidnapping and alleged forced marriage of a 22‑year‑old woman, alleged under Sections 87 and 137(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. The woman, who is a major, claimed that the petitioner abducted her, compelled her to have sexual relations, and forced a marriage ceremony in Lucknow despite his being already married. She had earlier obtained a protective writ from the Allahabad High Court, but later gave a statement under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S. alleging coercion. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the marriage was consensual and that the woman had filed the writ. The trial judge rejected the bail, noting the victim’s statements indicating force and the gravity of the offences. The Patna High Court affirmed the trial judge’s decision and denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner given the alleged kidnapping, forced marriage and sexual assault.
- Whether the victim’s statements under Section 180 constitute sufficient evidence of coercion to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 137(2), 87
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (Special) Act — s. 180
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- forced marriage
- sexual assault
- coercion
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18076 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2025 Thana- Karvandiya District- Rohtas
======================================================
Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Gupta @ Chhotu Son of Janki Sah Resident of
Village - Amri Tola, P.S.- Karwandiya, District - Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashwani Kumar Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajiv Nayan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Karwandiya P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025 dated 07.09.2025
registered under Section 87, 137 (2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case the informant’s daughter,
aged about 22 years, went to market, but did not return. Upon
search, informant came to know that the petitioner has
kidnapped the daughter of the informant with intention to marry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim
girl is major and there was love relationship between the
petitioner and the victim. The victim solemnized marriage with
the petitioner and Marriage Registration Officer, Uttar Pradesh
granted certificate of registration of marriage declaring that
marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl was solemnized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18076 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
on 03.09.2025 at Vedant Sanatan Hindu Seva Mandir, Lucknow,
U.P. The victim girl filed Criminal Misc. Writ Application No.
8742 of 2025 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad, Lucknow Bench seeking protection of her personal
liberty and a direction to the authorities not to interfere with the
peaceful life and personal liberty of the girl. Accordingly, a
Division Bench of Hon’ble High of Judicature at Allahabad
disposed the writ application with a direction to the opposite
parties not to interfere in the peaceful life and personal liberty of
the victim girl in any manner. Copy of the order passed by High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad at Lucknow Bench has been
annexed as Annexure – P/2.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
perused the impugned order. The learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge -IX, Rohtas at Sasaram while refusing the prayer
for anticipatory bail has taken note of the fact that paragraph no.
16 of the case diary contains the statement of the victim
recorded under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S. in which the victim
has stated that on 28.08.2025 the petitioner forcefully make her
sit in Scorpio and took her to Lucknow and forcefully
established sexual relation with her. She has also stated that on
03.09.2025 he forcefully took her to Lucknow Court, threatened
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18076 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
her and solemnized court marriage with her. The victim girl
herself has admitted in her statement and has also stated that the
petitioner forcefully took her with him and threatened her for
solemnization of marriage with him even though he was already
a married man, aged about 39 years, having children. She has
also admitted that marriage was solemnized out of fear. She
has also stated that she is not aware that any writ petition was
filed on her behalf before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court.
6. Accordingly, this Court agrees with the view of learned
Sessions Judge that it cannot be denied that the consent of
victim taken for filing of case or solemnization of marriage
could be achieved by the petitioner by compulsion and coercion
as at that time she was in the custody of the petitioner,
investigation in the case is still going on, as such, taking into
consideration the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.