Patna High Court

Ravi Sada@ Ravi KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravi Sada, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case alleging kidnapping of an informant's daughter for marriage, invoking sections 126(2), 115(2), 96, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The victim, however, recorded a statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. denying any kidnapping and stating that she left home of her own volition to marry the petitioner, who is also pregnant. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the 11‑day delay in filing the FIR and the petitioner's clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. Considering the victim's statement, the FIR delay, and the petitioner's clean record, the court allowed anticipatory bail, directing that if arrested within eight weeks the petitioner be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the victim's statement denying kidnapping
Whether the delay of 11 days in lodging the FIR affects the viability of the prosecution
Whether the petitioner's clean antecedents warrant bail despite the serious charges under the B.N.S.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 96
B.N.S.S. — s. 183, 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
kidnapping
marriage
FIR delay
victim statement
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22020 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Ravi Sada@ Ravi Kumar Son of Sakal Dev Sada Resident of Village-
                 Bhagwatur Ward No. 09, P.S.- Chhatapur, District- Supaul

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :        Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh 1, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 96, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this

                   petitioner, along with other F.I.R. named accused persons,

                   kidnapped the daughter of informant for the purpose of

                   marriage.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

                   committed no offence. During investigation, the victim was

                   recovered and in her statement recorded under Section 183 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22020 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          the B.N.S.S., she denied the factum of kidnapping and

          categorically stated that her parents wanted to marry her without

          her will and consent but she was in love with this petitioner and

          wanted to marry with him but her family members did not

          accept her request and, therefore, she left her house out of her

          own sweet will and went with this petitioner and both of them

          had solemnized marriage and she is pregnant also. Moreover,

          the present F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of 11

          days and there is no plausible explanation for the same which

          itself makes the entire prosecution case doubtful. Petitioner

          claims clean antecedents.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S., delay in lodging of the F.I.R. and clean antecedents of

          the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner is allowed.

                        7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22020 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                       each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,

                       Supaul in connection with Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 03 of 2025,

                       subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

                       B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…