Patna High Court

Jivlal YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 30 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court held that, given the general nature of the charge and the victim’s statement not implicating the petitioners, anticipatory bail was warranted.

Summary

The petitioners, Jivlal Yadav and his wife Sukanti Devi, sought anticipatory bail in a kidnapping case where they were alleged to have abducted a minor for marriage. The prosecution alleged that the accused, including the petitioners, were involved, but the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. did not name them. The petitioners argued they were falsely implicated because of familial ties to a co‑accused. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the general and omnibus nature of the accusation and the victim’s exonerating statement. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail, directing the petitioners to furnish 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 despite the general nature of the accusations under Sections 87, 137(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. absolves the petitioners from liability
Whether the conditions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. permit the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 3(5), 87
B.N.S.S. — s. 183, 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
kidnapping
false implication
Section 183
Section 482
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3947 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
           1.     Jivlal Yadav S/O Late Bhukhi Yadav R/O Village- Baheradih, P.S-
                  Barachatti, Distt.- Gaya.
           2.    Sukanti Devi W/O Jivlal Yadav R/O Village- Baheradih, P.S- Barachatti,
                 Distt.- Gaya.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioners     :        Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   30-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 87, 137(2)

                   and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the

                   F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,

                   kidnapped minor daughter of informant for the purpose of

                   marriage.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and

                   have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, the victim and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3947 of 2026(3) dt.30-03-2026
                                            2/3




          co-accused Dharmdeo Kumar had love affair and both of them,

          out of their own sweet will, fled away. Petitioners have falsely

          been implicated in this case merely because Petitioner No. 1 is

          father and Petitioner No. 2 is mother of co-accused Dharmdeo

          Kumar. During investigation, the victim was recovered and in

          her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she

          has not named these petitioners and alleged any wrong against

          them.

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

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioners.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and statement of

          the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., the

          prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.

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

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

          petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

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

          amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-IInd,

          Sherghati at Gaya in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 9

          of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3947 of 2026(3) dt.30-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…