Patna High Court
Govindra Kumar @ Govinda KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, sureties, and compliance with conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Govindra Kumar, was arrested in a Special POCSO case for alleged offences under Section 366(A) of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, stemming from a complaint that a minor girl, the informant's daughter, had eloped and married him. The petitioner contended that the marriage was consensual, the girl was 17 years old, and there was no wrongful act, citing her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the girl's minority at the time of the alleged act. The court examined the voluntary nature of the girl's conduct, the petitioner's clean antecedent, and the charge‑sheet status. Considering these factors, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a POCSO case involving alleged consensual marriage with a minor.
- Whether the voluntary nature of the minor's act and the accused's clean antecedent justify bail despite charges under Section 366(A) IPC and Section 8 POCSO.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 480(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- consent
- Section 366A
- Criminal Procedure Code
- family law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75890 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2023 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna
======================================================
Govindra Kumar @ Govinda Kumar Son of Rajdev Chaudhari @ Raodev
Chaudhari R/o Village - Fatehpur, P.S. - Dulhin Bazar, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mr. X Son of Late Munni Sao R/o Village - Badki Kharma, P.O. - Lala
Badsara, P.S. - Dulhin Bazar, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 234 of 2025 arising
out of Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 140 of 2023 registered for the
alleged offences under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code
and later on added Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
03. As per prosecution case, the minor daughter of the
informant went missing and the informant came to know about
the petitioner who was having friendly relationship with her
daughter and he showed his suspicion that his daughter eloped
with the petitioner.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75890 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.
Learned counsel further submits that the statement of the victim
girl was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she stated
that she has been knowing the petitioner for last 3-4 years and
they liked each other. On 19.04.2023, she eloped with the
petitioner and solemnized marriage with him. They stayed in
Delhi for one year and after returning, she has been staying in her
matrimonial home. Learned counsel further submits that the
statement shows there was no wrongful act on part of the
petitioner. The victim herself left her house on her own and went
with the petitioner to solemnize marriage. The petitioner is in
custody since 29.07.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted.
The petitioner is having clean antecedent.
05. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant oppose the submission made on behalf
of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that
if the daughter of the informant has solemnized marriage with the
petitioner, the informant has nothing to say in the matter.
However, learned counsel submits that the daughter of the
informant was minor at the time of occurrence.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
voluntary nature of act of the victim girl who is aged about 17
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75890 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
years and further considering the period of custody of the
petitioner and his clean antecedent along with submission of
charge-sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be
released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cum-
Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act, Patna/court concerned in
connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 234 of 2025 arising
out of Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 140 of 2023 , subject to the
conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of BNSS and the
following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75890 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
Checking your session…