Patna High Court
Shahnawaj Darji @ Sahanbaj Dargi @ Mh. Sahanwaj @ Sahanwaj Darji @ Md. Shahnawaj DarjiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
Pre‑arrest bail was denied; the bail application was dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Shahnawaj Darji, a 20‑year‑old, was charged in a kidnapping case involving the minor daughter of an informant, alleged to have been abducted for sale in the flesh trade. The FIR named him under IPC sections 363, 366(A) and 34, and the State highlighted his prior criminal antecedent under the POCSO Act. The petitioner sought pre‑arrest bail, claiming innocence, while the State and the informant’s counsel opposed, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and his past record. The Court examined the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC and noted the petitioner’s alleged role and prior POCSO case, concluding that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to surrender before the District Court for a regular bail application and dismissed the pre‑arrest bail petition.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to an accused of kidnapping a minor under IPC sections 363, 366(A) and 34, considering a prior POCSO conviction.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged participation in the kidnapping warrants denial of bail.
- Whether surrender and a regular bail application is the appropriate procedure in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- kidnapping
- minor
- POCSO
- IPC
- bail denial
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60932 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2023 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Shahnawaj Darji @ Sahanbaj Dargi @ Mh. Sahanwaj @ Sahanwaj Darji @
Md. Shahnawaj Darji, aged about 20 years, Son of Md. Ansari Darji @
Ansari Darji R/o Village- Baligarh, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Diwakar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Singh, APP
For the informant : Mr. Sita Ram Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Diwakar, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rajendra Singh, learned APP for
the State and Mr. Sita Ram Prasad, learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 402 of 2023 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 363,366(A),34, of the IPC.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, accused
persons named therein including the petitioner are said to have
kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant with wrongful
intent to sell her.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60932 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Petitioner has one criminal
antecedent, in which he is on bail.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant and learned APP for the State vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail. He submitted that
petitioner has one criminal antecedent and too under POCSO
Act. The role of the petitioner in the alleged offence cannot be
denied and as such, petitioner don’t deserve to be released on
pre-arrest bail.
6. I have perused the statement of the victim recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 183 BNSS,
The petitioner is aged about 20 years and allegation against him
is that he kidnapped the victim with the intention of selling her
and compelling her into the illicit flesh trade. It is also clear
from the allegation that the petitioner is of another religion and
statement of the victim reveals that she was never in relationship
with the petitioner. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent under
POCSO Act. In view of above, I am not inclined to grant pre-
arrest bail to the petitioner.
7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60932 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
surrender before the learned District Court and seek regular bail,
who has just emerged as an adult. In that case, the learned
District Court is directed to consider the bail application of the
petitioner giving due regard to the observation made in the case
of Vijayalakshmi & Anr. vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of
Police & Anr. reported in (2021) SCC OnLine Mad 317 by
Madras High Court, preferably on the same day on the basis of
materials collected in course of investigation.
8. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…