Patna High Court
Sumit Kumar @ GudduversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to bond and sureties, with the condition that the trial may not be delayed.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, was arrested in connection with alleged kidnapping, theft (IPC s.363) and rape (IPC s.376) as well as offences under the POCSO Act (ss.4,6). The victim, a minor, submitted a letter claiming she was in love with the petitioner, had eloped, and that her statements to the police were made under parental pressure. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated by the informant, who is the victim's father, and that the victim's letter demonstrated a lack of genuine prosecution. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the charges and the victim's statements recorded under Cr.P.C. ss.164 and 161. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted bail on condition of a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties, while reserving the right to cancel bail if the petitioner attempts to delay the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged kidnapping, theft, rape and offences under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim's letter indicating a consensual relationship and alleged coercion of her statements affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 164, 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- rape
- POCSO
- false implication
- victim testimony
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32605 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2023 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran
======================================================
Sumit Kumar @ Guddu S/O Late Ajit Kumar R/O Village- Ratanpura Bin
Toli, P.S- Chapra Muffasil, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pravin Ray S/O Late Saudagar Ray R/O Village- Naviganj Masumganj
Masumeshwar Nath Mandir, P.S- Bhagwan Bazar Chapra, Distt.- Saran at
Chapra.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar Barnwal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Nilesh Kumar Nirala, Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 25-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code
and later Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code read with
Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act was also added.
3. The case was taken up on 24.02.2026 when
informant and the victim were directed to remain physically
present before this Court. The informant for reasons best known
has not appeared, but then victim has appeared.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32605 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
4. The victim before the Court submits that Annexure-
3 to the bail application is in her own hand writing, but then the
petitioner had made her write that letter prior to the occurrence
itself. It is also submitted that a child was born, but then the
child presently is staying with the sister of the petitioner, it is
further submitted that petitioner had kidnapped her and
thereafter established physical relation based on which she
conceived and a child was born.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been
falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant who is
father of the victim and presently is posted with Jharkhand
Police. It is further submitted that no doubt the victim in her
statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has
supported the case of the prosecution, but then from perusal of
Annexure-3 to the bail application which is a letter written by
the victim in her own hand writing addressed to the President,
State Women Commission, Bihar, Patna, has stated therein that
her statement under Sections 164 Cr.P.C. and 161 Cr.P.C. be
recorded again, as she was in love with the petitioner and had
performed her marriage and also became pregnant, but then her
parents were against the marriage and thus she was pressurized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32605 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
to make a statement against the petitioner.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that it does not appear probable that petitioner even
prior to statement of the victim recorded under Sections 164 and
161 Cr.P.C. would have made her write a letter addressed to the
President, State Women Commission, Bihar, Patna, knowing
that victim would support the case of prosecution. It is also
asserted and submitted that petitioner and the victim had
performed their marriage and out of the wedlock, a child was
born. It is further submitted that from perusal of Annexure-3 to
the bail application, it would manifest that in the said letter, it is
also recorded that while the victim was going to the Court when
she was forcefully taken by her parents. It is next submitted that
petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2025, charges have been
framed and one prosecution witness has been examined. It is
next submitted that in the event of acquittal of the petitioner in
the trial, how his period of incarceration be compensated, but if
petitioner is granted the privilege of bail and ultimately if he is
convicted, he will serve the sentence, but then it is reiterated and
submitted that petitioner and the victim were in love and they
eloped. It is also submitted that if privilege of bail is granted to
the petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather will
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32605 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail
application of the petitioner.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioner above-named, is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Bhagwan Bazar P.S.
Case No. 260 of 2023.
9. It is made clear that if the learned Trial Court
comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after his release, is trying
to delay the trial in any manner, in that event the learned Trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
10. The personal appearance of the victim is dispensed
with.
11. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands
allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…