Patna High Court
Md. Rohan @ Rishav Raj @ RishavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that no case under Sections 366(A) and 34 IPC was made out and consequently granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Rohan, was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that he enticed the minor daughter of an informant and married her. The petitioner contended that the girl was near the age of majority, left her home voluntarily, and subsequently married him, now living a happy married life, and that her statement under Section 164 CrPC corroborated this. The informant indicated that the matter had been compromised and she did not wish to pursue the case, while the State argued that the victim’s minority rendered any consent immaterial. The Court, considering the victim’s voluntary statement, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the compromise, held that no case under the cited IPC sections was made out and granted bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with further conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the alleged conduct constitutes an offence under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code given the victim's age and alleged consent.
- Whether the State's contention that a minor's consent is immaterial defeats the petitioner's claim of innocence.
- Whether the compromise by the informant affects the prosecution's case.
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 164, 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 366A
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- minor
- consent
- IPC 366A
- CrPC
- compromise
- marriage
- victim testimony
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28930 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2022 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Md. Rohan @ Rishav Raj @ Rishav S/o Sanjay Singh Resident of Village -
Pakharia, P.S.- Town, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
Mr. Chitranjan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sushant Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Mona Verma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Roop Kishan, Advocate
Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
02. In the present case, the petitioner is apprehending
his arrest in connection with Begusarai Mufassil (Singhaul OP)
P.S. Case No. 148 of 2022 registered for the alleged offence
under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
03. As per prosecution case, minor daughter of the
informant was enticed away by the petitioner with the help of
other co-accused persons.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28930 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
case. No case under Section 336(A)/34 of IPC is made out
against the petitioner as the petitioner did not kidnap the victim
nor persuaded her to leave her house. The victim girl was at the
verge of majority and she left her house on her own and went
away with the petitioner and solemnized marriage with him.
Now the victim girl is major and she has been leading her
maternal life with the petitioner happily. The statement of the
victim girl was recorded under Section 164 CrPC wherein she
also stated that she went on her own and has solemnized
marriage with the petitioner at a temple in Katihar. Learned
counsel further submits that co-accused Md. Saddab has been
granted bail by a learned co-ordinate Bench vide order dated
01.09.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 27733 of 2022. The
petitioner has got fair antecedent.
05. Learned APP for the State opposes the submission
made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that the
victim being a minor girl, her consent is immaterial. Learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the
matter has been compromised and the informant does not want
to pursue the matter considering the future of her daughter and
the learned counsel concedes that the daughter of the informant
has been leading a happy married life with the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28930 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
peculiar facts and clean antecedent of the petitioner, let the
petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from
today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Begusarai/court concerned in connection with
Begusarai Mufassil (Singhaul OP) P.S. Case No. 148 of 2022,
subject to the condition laid down under Section 482(2) of
BNSS and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of
the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each
and every date fixed by the court below, if so
required by the learned trial court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.