Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sagar Kumar @ Ramshankar KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The petitioner has made out a prima facie case for anticipatory bail and is therefore entitled to its grant subject to the conditions imposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Sagar Kumar, aged 20, was charged under Section 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act for allegedly kidnapping a 17‑year‑old girl with the intention of marrying her. He claimed innocence, asserting that the victim voluntarily fled with him and solemnised a marriage, as recorded in her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS. The State opposed his request for pre‑arrest bail. The High Court, relying on the victim’s voluntary statement and the principle that youthful infatuation may mitigate culpability, referred to the Madras High Court decision in Vijayalakshmi & Anr. vs. State (2021) SCC OnLine Mad 317, and held that the petitioner had made a prima facie case for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court directed the District Court to grant anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, subject to a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC/Section 482(2) BNSS, and to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If any other cases are found, the bail order will automatically lapse.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory (pre‑arrest) bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case involving alleged kidnapping and a POCSO offence.
  • Whether the victim’s voluntary statement of marriage negates the element of kidnapping under Section 96 BNSS.
  • Whether the age difference and alleged consent affect the grant of bail in a POCSO case.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • pre‑arrest bail
  • kidnapping
  • child marriage
  • POCSO
  • BNSS
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 8 POCSO
  • victim consent
  • age of consent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.671 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
                                                        Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Sagar Kumar @ Ramshankar Kumar S/o- Raktu Mukhiya Village- Herkain
                 Suraha Near Mandir PS- Muffasil Distt- East Champaran

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    XX W/o- YY R/v- Barharwa W.No-11, Ps- Muffasil Dist- East Champaran

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :

                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate

                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP

                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   03-04-2026                    Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing

                   on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection

                   with Muffasil No. 115/2025 registered for the offence(s)

                   punishable under Sections 96, of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

                   and Section 8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences

                   Act.

                                 3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner

                   had kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant with an

                   intention to marry with her.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.671 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
                                            2/4




                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has

          falsely been implicated in the case. The victim in her statement

          recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has categorically stated

          that she had voluntarily fled with the petitioner and solemnized

          marriage with him (Annexure–P/2). Learned counsel further

          submitted 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 person undergo. The petitioner has clean antecedent. On

          these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest

          bail.

                       5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the

          prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

                       6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf

          of the parties, as well as, the nature of allegation made in the

          FIR and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183

          of the BNSS, wherein she has categorically stated that she had

          voluntarily fled away with the petitioner and solemnized

          marriage with him (Annexure–P/2), the petitioner, who is 20

          years old, has just emerged as an adult, going through
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.671 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
                                            3/4




          psychological, physiological, as well as, biological changes and

          infatuation and attraction for the opposite sex is natural and he

          may be unaware of the rigors of his wrong doing. Consideration

          in this regard can be made 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. I am of the opinion that the petitioner

          has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest

          bail.

                       7. The learned District Court is directed to release the

          petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or

          surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks

          from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

          thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending

          in connection with Muffasil No. 115/2025, subject to the

          condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C / 482(2)

          BNSS.

                       8. The 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 Para- 3 of the bail petition, this order will
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.671 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
                                                       4/4




                     automatically lose its force.



                                                (Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.