Patna High Court

Suraj Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the evidence does not substantiate the alleged kidnapping.

Summary

Suraj Kumar Gupta, a 21‑year‑old, was arrested in connection with an alleged kidnapping of an informant’s daughter under Sections 96, 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS. The prosecution claimed he abducted the girl, while the petitioner asserted that he was falsely implicated and that the victim’s own statement under Section 183 BNSS indicated she had gone voluntarily to a friend’s house. The petitioner, who had been in custody since 4 January 2025 and had no prior criminal record, applied for bail. The State opposed the bail application. The Court examined the FIR, case diary, the impugned order dated 25 June 2025 and the victim’s statement, finding no allegation of abduction or sexual assault against the petitioner. Consequently, the Court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the allegations of kidnapping under the BNS provisions
Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS negates the prosecution’s case of abduction

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
false implication
Section 183 statement
criminal procedure
BNS

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74016 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-374 Year-2024 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Suraj Kumar Gupta, male, aged about-21 years, S/o Vijay Sao @ Vijay Saw
                 Resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Sherghati, Dist.- Gaya
                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND
                 MALVIYA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   21-01-2026                          Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. Petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 96, 351(3) and 3(5) of the

                   BNS.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that

                   petitioner has kidnapped the daughter of the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

                   case. He next submits that name of the petitioner has been

                   surfaced only on the basis of suspicion. He next submits that

                   from perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under

                   Section 183 BNSS, the victim girl has stated that on 18.07.2024,

                   she went to Chatra at the house of her friend Nancy, Muskan

                   and Anjali where she was working in a shop and she has clearly

                   said that she does not want to go with her parents as her parents
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74016 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       scuffled her and her cousin also torture her. He submits that

                       petitioner is in custody since 04.01.2025 and has got no criminal

                       antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition.

                                    5. Learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for

                       bail of the petitioner.

                                    6. On perusal of the FIR, case diary and impugned

                       order dated 25.06.2025 and statement of the victim recorded

                       under Section 183 BNSS, it appears that victim herself gone

                       with     her     friends      and       there    is   no   allegation   of

                       abduction/kidnapping and sexual assault against the petitioner.

                       So, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case

                       and submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, let the

                       above-named petitioner be released on bail, on his furnishing

                       bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the

                       like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief

                       Judicial Magistrate in connection with Sessions Trial No. 105 of

                       2025/482 of 2025 arising out of Sherghati P.S. Case No.374 of

                       2024.



                                            (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Harshita/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…