Patna High Court
Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
Where the alleged victim, a minor, voluntarily accompanied the accused without force and the relationship appears consensual, the accused is entitled to pre‑arrest bail subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
Basant Kumar, a 23‑year‑old male, was charged under Sections 64, 96 and 137(2) of the Bihar Negotiable and Smuggling Act (BNSS) and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for allegedly abducting a 17‑year‑old girl with intent to marry her. The petitioner claimed the relationship was consensual and that the victim voluntarily accompanied him, a fact he said was reflected in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS. The State and the informant’s counsel opposed bail, arguing the offences involved a minor and constituted kidnapping and sexual assault. The court gave weight to the victim’s statement, noting that consensual relationships are a relevant factor in bail considerations, and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in State of U.P. v. Anirudh (2026). Consequently, the court granted pre‑arrest bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted in offences under the BNSS and POCSO when the alleged victim, a minor, claims she went voluntarily without force.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS outweighs the seriousness of the alleged offences.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s precedent on consensual relationships applies to bail decisions in POCSO‑related cases.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- POCSO
- abduction
- consensual relationship
- minor
- Section 183
- Section 482
- Bihar criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5088 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar, Gender, Male, aged
about 23 years, S/o Chandi Ram R/o Village - Ward no. 01, Khairwa Tola,
P.S - Chanpatia, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXXX Gender, Female, aged about 17 years, D/o YYYY R/o Village - Ward
No. 1, Khairwa Tola, P.S - Sirisiya, District - West Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner seeks to delete para no.14 of the bail petition in
course of the day.
2. Permission is accorded.
3. Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari,
learned APP for the State.
4. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 64, 96 and 137(2) of the
BNS and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
5. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
petitioner on the pretext of marriage has established physical
relationship with the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/4
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he was in
love relationship with the victim and has not forcibly kidnapped
her, rather the victim girl willingly went with the petitioner and
the said fact is evident as the informant has admitted in the FIR
that no force was put to her to accompany along with the
petitioner to go to Chandigarh and the very allegation that the
petitioner had forced and kidnapped her does not sustain. From
perusal of the FIR, it is apparent that both parties were in
relationship for quite some time and enjoyed each other’s
company for months together. The relationship was consensual.
Learned counsel further submitted mother of the petitioner had
lodged case against the father of the present informant and the
informant was putting pressure on the petitioner to marry with
her and lastly when she could not become successful in
persuading the petitioner to marry with her, she on the advise of
her parents has lodged the present case against the petitioner on
basis of the frivolous allegation.
7. Mr. Ram Kishun Prasad, learned counsel, has
tendered his appearance on behalf of the informant and has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail. He
submitted that the petitioner has committed crime with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/4
informant by establishing unnatural sex with her and also
subjected her to cruelty and assault and, as such, he don’t
deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.
8. Learned APP for the State also vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
9. Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf
of the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on
record, it appears that the allegation against the petitioner is of
abducting the informant who is minor with an intent to marry
her. However, it transpires from the statement of the victim
recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS that she has
categorically stated that she had gone with the petitioner
without any force, coercion or inducement. The parties were in a
consensual love relationship prior to the alleged occurrence. It is
well settled that the statement of the alleged victim is required
to be given due weight and consideration.
10. In case of State of U.P. vs. Anirudh & Anr.
reported in 2026 LiveLaw(SC)29, the Apex Court has observed
that where the relationship between the parties appears to be
consensual and founded on mutual affection, the same is a
relevant factor to be borne in mind while considering matters
relating to bail and prosecution. In the present case, the victim,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
4/4
in her statement, has indicated that she had gone with the
petitioner without any force, coercion or inducement. In such
circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has, prima
facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special
Judge, POCSO-cum-District and Additional Sessions Judge-VI,
Bettiah, West Champaran / Concerned Court in connection with
Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 , subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
11. The learned District Court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the
petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been
stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…