Patna High Court

Sunil YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted considering the victim’s statement, the long pre‑trial custody, and the circumstances of the case.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunil Yadav, was charged with kidnapping, abduction, and intent to marry a 17‑year‑old girl, later amended to include rape under Section 376 of the IPC and offences under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The FIR was lodged 50 days after the alleged incident, and the victim, in a statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., claimed she was in a consensual relationship and had married the petitioner. The petitioner had been in custody since 7 August 2024 with no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, while the petitioner’s counsel sought relief. The court, noting the victim’s statement, the prolonged pre‑trial detention, and the framing of charges on 14 November 2025, ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted in offences of kidnapping, rape and POCSO where the alleged victim is a minor but claims consent.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the length of pre‑trial custody justify bail.
Whether the absence of the opposite party’s representation affects the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366, 376
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
abduction
rape
POCSO
minor
consent
pre‑trial detention
Indian Penal Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70643 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHNAUR District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Sunil Yadav S/O Kisun Yadav @ Bauku Yadav R/O Vill - Sonere, P.S -
                 Lakhanour,Dist- Madhubani                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Kaila Saday S/o Late Chuman Saday R/O Vill.- Kachuvi, ward no.- 03. P.S-
                  Lakhnaur, Dist- Madhubani
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Pravashankar Mishra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   19-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. However, despite

                   service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party

                   no. 2

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections363/366 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and later on Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4/6 of the

                   POCSO Act was added.

                                3. Petitioner along with other accused persons are said

                   to have abducted the grand daughter of the informant with

                   intention to marry.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   First Information Report has been lodged after delay of 50 days

                   by the grandfather of the victim stating that the petitioner Sunil

                   Yadav had kidnapped the victim girl with the purposes of
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70643 of 2025(3) dt.19-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       marriage. It is also an admitted fact that the victim is aged about

                       17 years which is almost on the verge of majority and in her

                       statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. she has accepted

                       that she was in love relationship with the petitioner and she had

                       ran away to his house whereafter both had gone to Delhi where

                       they married each other. The petitioner is in custody since

                       07.08.2024 with no criminal antecedent.

                                    5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

                       application for bail.

                                        6. Taking into consideration the facts and

                       circumstances and also considering the statement of the victim

                       under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. coupled with the fact that

                       there has been long custody of the petitioner and the charges

                       have been framed on 14.11.2025, let the above named petitioner,

                       be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-

                       (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                       each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the

                       case is pending/successor court in connection with Lakhnaur

                       P.S. Case No. 97 of 2024.


                                                 (Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…