Patna High Court
RAHUL KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient grounds for continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, was charged with kidnapping offences under IPC sections 363, 366(A), 372 and 34, alleged to have abducted the informant's daughter along with co-accused Golu Kumar. The FIR, lodged three days after the alleged incident, named only Golu Kumar; Rahul's name appeared later based on a diary entry and a photograph showing him with the victim and Golu on a motorcycle, which the court found non‑suspicious. Rahul, a young student with no prior record, has been in custody since July 2023, and the prosecution has not examined any witnesses despite the charge‑sheet being filed in September 2023. The State opposed bail, arguing the victim remains missing, while the petitioner contended he had no knowledge of the victim's whereabouts and was merely a facilitator. Considering the delayed FIR, lack of substantive evidence, Rahul's minimal role, and the stagnation of the trial, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the allegations of kidnapping and the victim's non‑recovery
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged role as a facilitator warrants continued detention
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A, 372
Subjects
- kidnapping
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- facilitator
- delay in FIR
- victim not recovered
- juvenile bail
- common intention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34464 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2023 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/O Bindeshwari Mahto @ Vindeshwari Mahto R/O Vill.-
Mokhtiyarpur, Salkhanni, P.S.- Dalsinghsarai, Dist.- Samastipur.- 848114
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Arya Achint, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 16-02-2026 Heard Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned senior counsel
for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 372, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along
with other accused persons have kidnapped the daughter of the
informant.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the First Information Report was lodged against one Golu
Kumar and the name of the petitioner did not feature in the
same. As a matter of fact, the victim had willingly fled away
from her house along with one Golu Kumar and the first
information report was lodged after a delay of 3 days. It is
further submitted that the name of the petitioner transpired
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34464 of 2025(4) dt.16-02-2026
2/3
subsequently during the course of investigation in paragraph-30
of the case diary which is merely an information from a spy that
the petitioner happened to be a good friend of Golu Kumar and
a reference has been made to a video/photograph that the victim
was seen along with the petitioner and Golu Kumar on a
motorcycle. However, upon looking at the photograph in the
case diary, there does not appear to be anything suspicious. It is
further submitted that the motorcycle in question does not
belong to the petitioner and at best the case against the
petitioner can be said to be that of a facilitator in taking the
victim away by the said Golu Kumar who has been granted bail
on the ground of his juvenility as stated in para-15 of the
petition. The petitioner is in custody since 01.07.2023 and has
no criminal antecedent. The bail rejection order indicates that
the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case on 11.09.2023
and the charges were framed on 31.01.2024 itself but till date
i.e. 24.04.2025 not a single witness has been examined on
behalf of the prosecution.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for bail on the ground that the victim has still not
been recovered. In response, it has been submitted that the
petitioner has no idea about the whereabout of the victim and he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34464 of 2025(4) dt.16-02-2026
3/3
is lying in custody since 01.07.2023.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the factum of delay in the
FIR coupled with the fact that the petitioner is also a young
student and his role has been at best of a facilitator and there has
been no substantial progress in the trial, let the above named
petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Dalsinghsarai P.S. Case No. 233 of 2023, subject to the
conditions that:
(I) One of the bailor shall be the family member or
a close relative.
(I1) The petitioner shall appear on each and every
date till conclusion of trial and if the petitioner does not appear
on two consecutive dates without any substantial and
satisfactory reason, the learned court below would be at liberty
to cancel his bail bonds.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…