Patna High Court
Hareshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the allegations and material on record warranted the petitioner’s arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Hareshwar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving alleged kidnapping and sale of a minor girl. The prosecution alleged that co‑accused Chandan Kumar, in his confessional statement, implicated the petitioner in handing over the victim to others for a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs, and the victim’s statement under Section 183 supported this claim. The petitioner argued that he has a clean record, was not named in the FIR, and was falsely implicated based solely on the co‑accused’s confession. The court examined the statements, the victim’s age, and medical report indicating no overt injuries but the possibility of rape. Considering the seriousness of the offences under the B.N.S. and POCSO Acts and the material on record, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations under Sections 96 and 137(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused and the victim’s statement constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- child sexual abuse
- POCSO Act
- confessional statement
- minor
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28474 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-387 Year-2025 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul
======================================================
Hareshwar Yadav Son of Ghurup Yadav Resident of Village- Khiriya, P.S.-
Bagaha, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bibi Jubeda Khatoon W/O Nisarool R/O Village- Ghuran, P.S.- Supaul,
Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prithvi Nath Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Prithvi Nath Mishra, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 387/2025, F.I.R. dated
26.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 96 and
137(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the co-accused
persons are alleged to have kidnapped the informant’s minor
daughter for selling her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28474 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the
F.I.R. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the
petitioner has transpired on the basis of the confessional
statement of the co-accused, Chandan Kumar.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
In para. 92 of the case diary, confessional statement of the co-
accused, Chandan Kumar is mentioned in which he has stated
that he has handed over the victim to the petitioner and the
petitioner along with the co-accused, Virendra Rai and Sunaina
Kumar took the victim to Himachal Pradesh and sold the victim
to one Darshan Singh for Rs. 2 lakhs. The victim in her
statement recorded u/s 183 of the B.N.S.S. has supported the
prosecution story. In para. 168 of the case diary education
certificate of the victim is mentioned in which the date of birth
is 01.01.2008 which suggests that on the date of occurrence the
victim was a minor girl. The medical report of the victim
suggests that no fighting sign or any sign of physical assault
found but “rape cannot be ruled out”.
6. Considering the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R,
the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28474 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
B.N.S.S. has supported the prosecutions story as well as the
materials available on record, I am not inclined to grant the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection
with Supaul P.S. Case No. 387/2025 pending in the court of
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge cum Special
Jduge, POCSO Act, Supaul.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…