Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sudhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail as the allegations do not establish a prima facie case against him.

Summary

Sudhir Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging kidnapping of two minor girls for marriage, under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended he merely handed the girls over to a third person, Deepak, and had no role in any kidnapping. The victims' statements recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. indicated they went with Deepak voluntarily. The High Court examined the FIR, victim statements, and investigation material and found the allegations against the petitioner not substantiated. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner had a prima facie case for anticipatory bail and directed the District Court to release him on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedents and conditions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the present kidnapping case
  • Whether the allegations under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the B.N.S. constitute a case strong enough to deny bail
  • Whether the victim statements under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. support the charge against the petitioner

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • kidnapping of minors
  • false implication
  • Section 137
  • Section 87
  • Section 183
  • Section 482
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68936 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-499 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Sudhir Kumar S/o- Naval Mahto Village - Bhasar ward no. 8, P.S. - Sitamarhi,
                 Dist. - Sitamarhi

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Ms. 'X' W/o- Late Narayan Mahto R/v- Bhasar W.No-1, Ps- Sitamarhi Dist-
                 Sitamarhi

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

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

                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP

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

3   20-02-2026                          Heard Mr. Virendra Kumar, learned counsel

                   appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Ranjit

                   Ranjan, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 499 of 2025 registered under

                   Sections 137(2), 87 of the BNS.

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

                   petitioner along with other co-accused kidnapped the two minor

                   daughters of the informant with an intention to marry her.

                                 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68936 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
                                            2/4




          been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel

          submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he,

          allegedly, handed over the two minor daughters of the informant

          to the accused, namely Deepak, with whom the two minors

          subsequently went to visit tourist places. However, the

          petitioner, who is a shop owner, had no role in the alleged

          kidnapping of the minor daughters, who themselves went along

          with Deepak. It is further submitted that in the statements

          recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., the victims had

          stated that the petitioner merely handed them over to the said

          accused Deepak. The petitioner, who is aged about 22 years, has

          clean antecedent. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be

          released on pre-arrest bail.

                       5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest

          bail and submitted that although the F.I.R. has not been lodged

          under the POCSO Act against the petitioner, the allegations in

          the F.I.R. and the statements of the two victims recorded under

          Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. indicate that a case is made out

          against the petitioner as the petitioner forcefully, after holding

          the hands of the two victims, handed them over to the accused

          Deepak, and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve pre-arrest
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68936 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
                                            3/4




          bail.

                       6. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the

          prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

                       7. Having heard the rival submissions of the parties,

          as well as, having perusal the FIR, the statements of the two

          victims recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., and the

          material collected during the course of investigation, I find that

          the allegation against the petitioner is not supported by the

          victims that the petitioner had allegedly handed them over to the

          accused Deepak, with whom the two victims went to different

          places and subsequently they returned back to home on their

          own. In view of the above material, I am of the opinion that the

          petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on

          anticipatory bail.

                       8. The learned District Court is directed to release the

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

          surrender before the learned District Court 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 Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 499 of 2025, subject

          to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68936 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
                                                       4/4




                     BNSS//438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                                  9. The learned District Court is directed to verify

                     the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in

                     paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is

                     pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in

                     paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.



                                               (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.