Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar @ GoluversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail as a prima facie case in his favour exists.
Summary
Jitendra Kumar, a 22‑year‑old, was arrested in connection with a case alleging kidnapping of a minor girl for the purpose of marriage, under Sections 137(2), 87 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The girl’s statement under Section 183 BNSS claimed she voluntarily eloped with the petitioner and denied any force or sexual assault. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Rajesh Kumar, argued that he was unaware of the victim’s minority, had no prior criminal record, and that the victim’s declaration negated the kidnapping allegation. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the protective provisions of the POCSO Act. Justice Purnendu Singh, after considering the victim’s voluntary statement and the petitioner’s clean antecedents, held that a prima facie case existed in favour of bail and ordered the petitioner’s release on pre‑arrest bail subject to a bond and sureties, with verification of antecedents by the District Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail in a case involving alleged kidnapping of a minor for marriage under the B.N.S.
- Whether the victim’s voluntary statement under Section 183 BNSS negates the alleged offence of kidnapping.
- Whether the provisions of the POCSO Act preclude the grant of bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 183, 3(5), 482(2), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- kidnapping
- child marriage
- POCSO Act
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87192 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2025 Thana- JITNA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar @ Golu, Male, aged about 22 yrs., Son of Bigan Sah,
Resident of Village- Bijabani Baraiya Tola, P.S.- Jitna, District- East
Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Jitna P.S. Case No. 109 of 2025, registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner
along with other accused persons, had kidnapped the minor
daughter of the informant with an intention to perform marriage
with her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner has just emerged as an adult
and is aged about 22 years and he was in love relationship with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87192 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
the daughter of the informant though he was not conscious of
the fact that she has not attained her majority. Both daughter of
the informant, as well as, the petitioner were also unaware of the
stringent provision of POCSO Act and it is well known that the
petitioner was emerging as an adult and was going through
several psychological and physiological change in his body. The
victim has nowhere alleged in her statement recorded under
Section 183 BNSS that the petitioner, in any manner, has
forcibly kidnapped her and committed any sexual assault, rather,
she has given declaration before the concerned magistrate that
she, on her own, went to Kathmandu along with the petitioner.
Victim girl is now living along with her parents. Petitioner has
clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioner seeks to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. I appreciate the reason given by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has just
emerged as an adult and he was in love relationship with the
daughter of the informant, who too has supported the said fact
under statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS and she has
also stated that she, on her own, had eloped with the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87192 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
and it is informed that victim girl is now living along with her
parents. I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima facie,
made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, 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 District Court where the
case is pending, in connection with Jitna P.S. Case No. 109 of
2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…