Patna High Court
Shivbalak Sahani @ ModiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Shivbalak Sahani, was charged with kidnapping and sexual offences against a minor under sections 96 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that he abducted the informant's daughter, took her to Nepal, assaulted her, and later abandoned her in an orchard. The petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual, the victim was an adolescent of about 16‑18 years, and that the kidnapping did not fall within IPC section 366A. Conflicting statements were recorded from the victim under sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S., with the later statement alleging forced intercourse. After hearing both sides, the court found no compelling reason to deny bail and ordered the petitioner released on regular bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite allegations under the POCSO Act and kidnapping provisions.
- Whether the victim's statements under sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. create a prima facie case warranting denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 180, 183, 3(5), 96
- Indian Penal Code — s. 366A
- POCSO Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- regular bail
- kidnapping
- POCSO Act
- minor
- sexual assault
- consent
- age of consent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62529 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-477 Year-2024 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Shivbalak Sahani @ Modi S/o Nagendra Sahani R/V - Mahuawa, PS- Dhaka,
Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kashim Mansuri C/o Late Sahid Mansuri R/o vill - Mahuawa, P.S.- Dhaka,
Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Advocate
Mr. Harsh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Salaj Kumar Rai, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
Mr. Ujjwal Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Mohan Kr. Tiwari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 96 and 3(5)
of the B.N.S. and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner
along with other has kidnapped the minor daughter of the
informant while she has gone to ease herself.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. During
course of investigation, the victim has given her statement
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62529 of 2025(5) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
recorded under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. wherein she has stated
that she was on talking terms with the petitioner and they were
in courtship. On the date of occurrence, the petitioner called her
and on his call, she came out from her house on the pretext of
easing herself. It is further stated that the petitioner took her to
Malahi Tola, Nepal and was kept in a house. It is further stated
by the victim that she was being assaulted by the petitioner. As
the petitioner came to know that case was lodged, he left the
victim in an orchard. The victim has also given her statement
recorded under Section 183 of BNSS wherein she has stated that
the petitioner has established physical relationship with her by
force. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from
perusal of the statement of the victim under section 180 of
BNSS, it is clear that it is a case of romantic relationship of
adolescent. It has further been submitted that section 366A of
IPC is not attracted as the kidnapping was not for the purpose as
required under above section. Learned counsel for the petitioner
has further submitted that from perusal of the medical report of
the victim, it is clear that the age of the victim is about 16-18
years. Victim has given two statements during investigation one
is under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. and another is under Section
183 of B.N.S.S. The statement of the victim under Section 180
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62529 of 2025(5) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
of the B.N.S.S. is the previous statement and the victim has
developed the story of physical intercourse in her statement
under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. A statement has been made in
para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal
antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since
19.06.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
of regular bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Dhaka P.S. Case No. 477 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned 6th District and Additional
Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act, East
Champaran at Motihari.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…