Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Bittu Yadav @ Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner.

Summary

Petitioner Bittu Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case originally filed under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, later amended to include Section 137(2) of the same code and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The prosecution alleged that he assisted co‑accused Randheer Yadav in kidnapping the informant's niece, but the petitioner contended that no specific act was attributed to him and that he was implicated merely due to his friendship with the co‑accused. He asserted his innocence and clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. Considering the nature of the accusation, the lack of a direct charge against the petitioner, and his clean record, the Court granted anticipatory bail, directing that if arrested within eight weeks he be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations and the amendments to the charges

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • kidnapping
  • POCSO Act
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • clean antecedent
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82552 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Bittu Yadav @ Bittu Kumar S/o Munna Yadav R/o Village - Chaumukha, P.S -
                 Yogapatti, District - West Champaran

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X S/o Y (Informant) R/o Village - Madhopur Bairiya, P.O - Amolwa, P.S -
                 Gaunaha, District - West Champaran

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-01-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for

                   the offences punishable under Sections 96, 3(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita to which Section 137(2) of the BNS and Sections

                   8, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act

                   were added later on.

                                3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner assisted co-

                   accused Randheer Yadav in kidnapping the niece of informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. As per

                   F.I.R., specific accusation of kidnapping is against co-accused

                   Randheer Yadav and this petitioner has been made accused in
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82552 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                                          2/2




                        this case merely because he happens to be friend of co-accused

                        Randheer Yadav. There is no specific accusation of any overt act

                        against the petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                        the bail application.

                                     6. Considering backdrop of the case, nature of

                        accusation and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed

                        and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event

                        of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of

                        eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-

                        bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like

                        amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge- 6 th

                        cum Special Judge, POCSO, Bettiah, West Champaran in

                        connection with Bettiah (Town) P. S. Case No. 190 of 2025,

                        subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

                        Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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