Patna High Court
Sumit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of a bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case registered under sections 65(1), 115(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, alleging that he eloped with a 17‑year‑10‑month‑old girl and had physical relations with her under the pretext of marriage. The petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual, the girl was on the verge of attaining majority and voluntarily stayed with him for about 52 days, and that she refused a medical examination. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner had established physical relations with a minor under false pretences. The Court examined the victim's age, the consensual nature of the relationship, the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and the fact that he had been in custody since 29‑05‑2025. Concluding that the victim’s near‑majority status and voluntary conduct mitigated the seriousness, the Court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, directing the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a POCSO case where the alleged victim is a minor but near the age of majority and the relationship is claimed to be consensual
- Whether the statutory provisions of the B.N.S Act, 2023 and POCSO Act preclude bail in such circumstances
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 115(2), 3(5), 351(3), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- consensual relationship
- criminal procedure
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74139 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Nawada
======================================================
Sumit Kumar S/O Dinesh Prasad Vishwakarma R/o Vill.- Govindpur Dih,
P.S.- Govindpur, Dist.- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rachna Kumari D/O Vinod Chaudhary R/o - Govindpur, P.O. and P.S.-
Govindpur, Dist.- Nawada
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mohit Raj, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, APP
For the OP No.2 : Mr. Arvind Kr. Sinha, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Mahila P.S. Case no.13 of 2025
registered under sections 65(1), 115(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of
B.N.S, 2023 and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner eloped with
the victim girl and established physical relations with her on the
pretext of marriage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present case arises out of a consensual love relationship between
two individuals. It is contended that, at the very least, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74139 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
informant/victim, as per her own assertion, is aged about 17
years and 10 months, being on the verge of attaining majority,
and therefore possessed sufficient maturity and rationality to
make her own decisions. It is further submitted that a perusal of
the allegations made in the F.I.R. would indicate that the
informant/victim had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner to
Bangalore, where physical relations were established between
them. Thereafter, upon returning to her native village, it is
alleged that the petitioner again established physical relations
with her. It is further submitted that the petitioner and the victim
resided together for approximately 52 days, during which period
no complaint was lodged by her family members, which,
according to the petitioner, indicates that the victim had
willingly accompanied and stayed with him. Further, the victim
has also refused to undergo medical examination and the
petitioner is in custody since 29.05.2025 and undertakes to
cooperate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2 on the ground that the petitioner established physical
relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage.
6. Taking into consideration the rival contentions of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74139 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
the parties and also considering the fact that the
informant/victim is either a major or at the verge of majority and
it is her conscious and informed choice to be in a relationship
which seems to have materialized, coupled with the fact that
petitioner is in custody since 29.05.2025 and has no criminal
antecedent, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Mahila P.S. Case no.13 of 2025 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 concerned where the case is pending/successor Court.
However, it is made clear that petitioner would appear before
the Court concerned on the date fixed for framing of charge and
the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial without
giving unnecessary adjournment.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…