Patna High Court
Ismail Gaddi @ Ismail GadiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ismail Gaddi, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, alleging kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor. The petitioner claimed the allegations were false, asserting that the victim, a 16‑year‑old, had previously been in a consensual relationship with him and that her statements under Section 180 did not support the prosecution, while her later statement under Section 183 was contradictory. The informant and the State opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s minority and the lack of legal weight to any consent given by a minor. The court examined the submissions and the statutory provisions, noting that consent of a minor is legally irrelevant and that the allegations prima facie attracted the offences mentioned. Consequently, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner’s prayer.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in the present case.
- Whether the alleged consent of a minor can be considered valid under the BNS, 2023.
- Whether the facts disclosed constitute offences under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(3), 180, 183, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- minor
- consent
- kidnapping
- sexual assault
- BNS 2023
- Sections 137, 140, 3, 180, 183
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18362 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2026 Thana- BALTHAR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Ismail Gaddi @ Ismail Gadi S/o Deba Gaddi R/o Vill- Bhawari, P.S.- Balthar,
Distt- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha No. 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 137(2),
140(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges
that his daughter was kidnapped by the petitioner on
06.01.2026.
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 petitioner and the victim
were known to each other and the victim, in her statement
recorded under Section 180 BNSS, has not supported the case of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18362 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
the prosecution but then when her statement was recorded under
Section 183 BNSS, she stated that she was known to the
petitioner and for the last two years, they were on talking terms
and petitioner, on false pretext of marriage, established physical
relation and on the date of occurrence, he forcefully took her
away and again established physical relation. It is, thus,
submitted that when the relationship soured, the present false
case came to be instituted.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of
the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the description of
the petitioner, it would manifest that he is aged about 35 years
and the victim is a minor aged about 16 years and the petitioner
in garb of marrying the victim enticed her and thereafter
forcefully established physical relation which also manifests
from her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS. It
is further submitted that consent of a minor does not have any
evidentiary value in the eye of law.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State also opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18362 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026
pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class,
West Champaran at Bettiah/Successor Court.
8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…