Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, was charged with kidnapping the minor daughter of an informant, theft of Rs. 1,50,000 and jewellery, and conducting a child marriage, under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the POCSO Act and the Child Marriage Act. He applied for bail, claiming innocence, lack of incriminating material, and that the victim voluntarily married him, as per her statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and citing a Supreme Court precedent that discourages bail once trial witnesses are examined. The High Court considered the nature of the accusations, the stage of the trial, and the gravity of the offences, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected and the trial court was directed to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in serious offences involving child kidnapping, theft, and child marriage at the current stage of trial.
- Whether the victim's statement of voluntary marriage negates the applicability of the Child Marriage Act.
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent on bail in serious offences is applicable to the present case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 3(5), 65(1), 96
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- child kidnapping
- theft
- child marriage
- POCSO
- serious offences
- high court
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79651 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2024 Thana- BIHRA District- Saharsa
======================================================
Nitish Kumar Son of Devanand Yadav R/o Village- Belahi Ward No. 7, P.S.-
Bihra, District- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X Wife of - Y R/o Village- Rakiya Ward No. 6, P.S.- Bihra, District- Saharsa
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused
the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bihra
P.S. Case No. 213 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable
under Section 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, later on
Sections 137(2), 65(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, read with Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act and Section 9 of
Child Marriage Act was added.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that minor
daughter of the informant went missing at night from her house
and also took Rs. 1,50,000/- along with gold jewellery from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79651 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
almirah with her. It is further alleged that the petitioner lured the
minor daughter of the informant and took her away with him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No
incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner
also submitted that the petitioner has not committed such
offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted that the
victim has not stated anything against the petitioner in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 rather she has stated that she went on
her own will to the house of the petitioner and solemnized
marriage with him. The petitioner is in custody since 04.12.2024
and has got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the petitioner and submitted that there is specific
allegation levelled against the petitioner of luring the victim
who is a minor and performing marriage with her. Learned
counsel for the informant also submitted that the trial is in
progress and five witnesses have already been examined in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79651 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
case. Learned counsel for the informant relied upon a decision
of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC
3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph
no. 14, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under:
“14. Ordinarily in serious offences
like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial
commences and the prosecution starts
examining its witnesses, the Court, be it the
Trial Court or the High Court should be
loath in entertaining the bail application of
the accused.”
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation, present stage of the case and
the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail
to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…