Patna High Court
Krishna Kumar Sahu @ Sri Krishna Sahu @ Sri Krishna KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Krishna Kumar Sahu, was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the SC/ST Act and the POCSO Act for allegedly abducting the informant's daughter with the intent of marriage. He contended that the alleged incident was a consensual love affair and that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS exonerated him. The State argued that the victim’s statement corroborated the FIR and that the seriousness of the offences warranted denial of bail. The High Court, after considering the nature and gravity of the charges and the victim’s statement, declined to grant bail and ordered the trial court to expedite the trial. Consequently, the petition for bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the offences under the BNSS, SC/ST Act and POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS negates the prosecution’s case and justifies bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 62, 87, 96, 98
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 18, 8
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(va), 3(2)(w)(i)
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- marriage
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- SC/ST Act
- POCSO Act
- criminal procedure
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89153 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- KALUAHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Krishna Kumar Sahu @ Sri Krishna Sahu @ Sri Krishna Kumar Son of Ram
Chandra Sahu @ Chanar Sahu Resident of Village - Haripur Bakshi Tol, P.S. -
Kaluahi, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Son of YYY R/o Village and P.O. - Haripur Dih Tola, P.S. - Haripur,
P.S. - Kaluahi, Dist. - Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
for the O.P. No.2 : Mr.Dharmveer, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused
the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kaluahi
P.S. case No. 24 of 2025 (G.R. No. 314 of 2025) instituted for
the offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 96, 98 and 62 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sections 3(2)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of
the SC/ST Act and Section 8, 12 and 18 of the POCSO Act.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has
been withdrawn vide order dated 20.11.2025 passed in Criminal
Appeal (SJ) No. 3704 of 2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89153 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that petitioner
along with other co-accused had taken away the daughter of the
informant for the purpose of marriage.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
occurrence took place on 12.02.2025, whereas F.I.R. has been
instituted on 16.02.2025. There is love affection between the
victim and the petitioner and she herself went with the petitioner
according to her sweet will. He further submitted that in the
statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 of BNSS, she has
stated that petitioner has never committed any wrong act with
her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the
petitioner is in custody since 11.03.2025 and has no criminal
antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that victim in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has
corroborated the contents of the FIR and therefore, the petitioner
does not deserve to be released on bail. The I.O of this case after
completion of the investigation submitted Chargesheet u/s
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89153 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
137(2), 87, 74, 96, 98 and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, sections 8, 12 and 18 of the POCSO Act and section 3(2)
(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
9. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…