Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner as the alleged victim is a major who married voluntarily, and there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or fleeing.
Summary
Petitioner Rahul Kumar sought bail after being implicated in a kidnapping case under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The alleged victim, a 19‑year‑old woman, testified that she left her home of her own volition, married the petitioner voluntarily, and faced no coercion. The petitioner asserted innocence and no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the alleged kidnapping. The court, noting the victim’s consent, her majority, and the absence of any indication that the petitioner would tamper with evidence or flee, granted bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed compliance conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged kidnapping and forced marriage under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNSS.
- Whether the victim’s age and voluntary consent to marriage affect the grant of bail.
- Whether there is a risk of the petitioner tampering with evidence or absconding.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 137(2), 482(2), 96
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- marriage
- consent
- BNSS
- Section 482
- Section 137
- Section 96
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57308 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Rahul Kumar son of Ramchandar Yadav Village- Narhaiya, Ward no. 01, Ps-
Chhatapur, Dist- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar bihar
2. Poonam Devi wife of Raman Yadav Resident Of Village - Dinapatti, Ward
no. 5, Ps- Murliganj, Dist- madhepura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Murliganj P.S. Case No.118 of 2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Allegedly, on 19.03.2025 at about 05:30 A.M., the
informant’s daughter went out for a walk and did not return. Upon
making a search, the informant came to know that the petitioner,
in collusion with others, had kidnapped her daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that the victim is a major and
had married the petitioner out of her own free will and is
presently residing with him. It is further submitted that, on
perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57308 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
of the BNSS, it is evident that the victim is 19 years of age. She
has categorically stated that due to threats of dire consequences
by her family members, she left her house at about 01:00 A.M. at
night and at about 03:30 A.M, she called the petitioner and they
got married at Shiv Mandir. Thereafter, they went to Bangalore
and stayed there for about 8–10 days, and on coming to know that
case has been registered against the petitioner and his family
members, she returned to Madhepura and from the station, she
was recovered by the police. The victim has further stated that
there was no coercion in the marriage and that she does not wish
to go with her parents. She has clearly expressed her desire to stay
with the petitioner and his family. Lastly, it is submitted that the
petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
6. Be that as it may, since the victim had married the
petitioner out of her own will and she is major, let the above
named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six
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 the learned J.M. 1st,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57308 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
Madhepura/Successor Court in connection with Murliganj P.S.
Case No.118 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following
conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of
his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U T
Checking your session…