Patna High Court
Krishna Kumar @ Krishna Kumar RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court provisionally grants pre‑arrest bail and orders the District Court to pass a fresh reasoned order in light of the applicable legal principles.
Summary
Krishna Kumar, a 20‑year‑old, was charged under IPC Sections 363 and 366A for allegedly kidnapping the 17‑year‑old daughter of an informant with the intention of marrying her. The petitioner claimed the relationship was consensual, that the girl voluntarily stayed with him for 8‑10 days and later returned, and that he was unaware of the legal consequences under the POCSO Act. The victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 was deemed unreliable by the petitioner’s counsel. The State opposed pre‑arrest bail. The High Court observed that the trial court had not adequately considered the ages of the parties and directed it to pass a fresh reasoned order, relying on the Madras High Court decision in Vijayalakshmi & Anr. v. State Rep. (2021). In the interim, the petitioner was provisionally released on pre‑arrest bail subject to conditions, and the bail application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in a case of alleged kidnapping of a minor under IPC Sections 363 and 366A.
- Whether the alleged consensual relationship and the ages of the accused (20) and victim (17) affect the bail decision.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 can be relied upon.
- Applicability of the precedent set by Vijayalakshmi & Anr. v. State Rep. (2021) to the present bail application.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- kidnapping
- minor
- IPC
- POCSO
- consent
- age factor
- provisional bail
- Madras High Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.639 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2024 Thana- GAUTAMBUDHNAGAR District-
Siwan
======================================================
Krishna Kumar @ Krishna Kumar Ram S/o Dilip Ram @ Dilip Kumar R/o
Village- Jalalpur Tatwa Tola, P.S- G.B. Nagar Tarwara, Dist- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Gautam Buddha Nagar P.S. Case No. 252 of 2024
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and
366A of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., petitioner
who is aged about 20 years allegedly kidnapped the minor
daughter of the informant with an intention to marry with her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent. He has just
emerged as an adult and he was in relationship with the minor
daughter of the informant. The daughter of the informant was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.639 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
not kidnapped rather she on her own had accompanied the
petitioner and she returned after living with him for nearly 8-10
days. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 183
BNSS though has supported the prosecution story, but the same
cannot be relied as there is every likelihood that she may have
been tutored by her parents and other family members. Learned
counsel further submits that the petitioner has just emerged as
an adult being aged about 20 years and the victim is aged about
17 years and at this stage, natural attraction for the opposite sex
cannot be denied coupled with the several psychological and
physiological change a person undergoes. He further submitted
that the petitioner, at this tender age, was unaware of the rigors
of the POCSO Act and the legal consequences arising out of a
relationship with a minor. The petitioner has clean antecedent.
On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-
arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the allegation made in the F.I.R., I find
that the learned District Court has totally failed to consider that
the petitioner has just emerged as an adult, on the date of alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.639 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
incidence, he was aged about 20 years and the daughter of the
informant was 17 years, natural attraction for the opposite sex
cannot be denied coupled with the several psychological and
physiological change, a person undergoes. I find it proper to
direct the learned District Court to pass a fresh reasoned order in
light of the law laid down by the Madras High Court in the case
of Vijayalakshmi & Anr. vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of
Police & Anr. reported in (2021) SCC OnLine Mad 317, within
a period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this order.
7. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail provisionally on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems fit and proper,
subject to outcome of the final order passed by the learned
District Court.
8. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.