Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Niraj Kumar, sought regular bail in a criminal case alleging kidnapping of a minor daughter of an informant, charged under Sections 173(2), 96 and 3(5) of the BNS. The prosecution argued that the petitioner had retained the minor without guardian permission, while the petitioner contended that the victim had eloped and married him, citing a medical report indicating the victim was 18‑20 years old. The petitioner’s counsel highlighted his clean antecedents and that he had been in custody since 01‑09‑2025. The Additional Prosecutor opposed bail. Considering the facts, the court decided to grant bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite charges of kidnapping a minor under Sections 173(2), 96 and 3(5) of the BNS.
  • Whether the alleged elopement and the victim's age affect the grant of bail.
  • Whether the conditions of a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties satisfy the requirements for bail.

Legislation cited

  • BNS — s. 173(2), 180, 183, 3(5), 96

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • kidnapping
  • minor
  • elopement
  • criminal procedure
  • BNS
  • Section 173(2)
  • Section 96
  • Section 3(5)
  • bond
  • sureties

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88725 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2025 Thana- Arar District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Niraj Kumar son of Late Hiralal Mukhiya Resident of Village- parsaha Ward
                 no. 10, Ps- Arar, Dist- Madhepura

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Subodh Mukhiya C/o Laxmi Mukhiya Resident of Village- Parsaha Ward
                 no. 10, P.S.- Arar, Dist- Madhepura

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 173(2), 96

                   and 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner has kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

                                4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   learned trial court has recorded in its order that “Statement u/s 180

                   & 183 BNSS made by victim girl in which she stated that she has

                   eloped with Niraj Kumar (petitioner) and married with him in a

                   temple at Purniya. So, after scanning of statements of victim girl it

                   is quite apparent that petitioner was in continuous company of the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88725 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      victim girl and has retained the minor girl of informant without

                      permission of her legal guardian”. Learned counsel for the

                      petitioner has submitted that from perusal fo the medical report it

                      is clear that the Doctor has opined that the victim is aged about 18

                      to 20 years. As the victim has eloped with the petitioner it is clear

                      case of elopement. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

                      submitted that the petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and is in

                      judicial custody since 01.09.2025.

                                   5. Learned Additional Prosecutor for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioner.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

                      the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The

                      above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in

                      connection with Arar P.S. Case No. 03 of 2025 on furnishing bail

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

                      amount each to the satisfaction of learned JM 1 st Class,

                      Udakishunganj, Madhepura.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

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.