Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar KushwahaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court refused to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Kundan Kumar, was charged with kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The minor’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code alleged that the petitioner and an accomplice abducted her, confined her in a room, and that the accomplice had sexual relations with her while the petitioner locked the door. The petitioner has been in custody since 17‑12‑2025. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, declined to grant regular bail, noting the seriousness of the allegations. The court directed the trial court to expedite the trial but expressly stated it was not passing on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor under IPC 366(A) and POCSO Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • kidnapping
  • sexual assault
  • minor
  • IPC 366A
  • POCSO Act
  • CrPC 164
  • bail rejection

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7648 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-609 Year-2021 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Kushwaha S/O Shambhu Singh R/O
                 Village- Bari Mushehari, P.S.- Chapra Mufassil, District- Saran.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner
                                                      Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Anju Devi W/O Pramod Sharma R/O Village- Marahia, P.S- Chapra
                 Muffasil, Distt.- Saran.

                                                         ... ... Opposite Parties
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner     :        Mr. Dr Harendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party :        Mr. Renuka Ratnakar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   14-05-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                   2.       This application for grant of regular bail

                   arises out of Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No.609 of 2021

                   registered for the offence punishable under section 366(A) of

                   the Indian Penal Code and under section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

                                   3.       The petitioner is accused of kidnapping the

                   victim girl.

                                   4.       The minor victim girl in her statement

                   recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that the

                   petitioner and one Aakash Kushwaha have brought her to Patna

                   and thereafter they kept her in a room and Aakash Kushwaha

                   has established sexual relationship with the victim girl for
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7648 of 2026(6) dt.14-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      fifteen days. The victim girl has also stated that this petitioner

                      used to lock the door from outside.

                                      5.      The      petitioner         is   in   custody   since

                      17.12.2025.

                                      6.      Considering the nature of allegation levelled

                      against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner

                      privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is

                      rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and

                      conclude the same as early as possible.

                                      7.      It is clarified that this Court has not

                      expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the

                      observations made by this Court is only for the purpose of

                      deciding this bail application.



                                                              (Sandeep Kumar, J)

pawan/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.