Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar @ Dipak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, finding that the circumstances did not warrant denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, where the prosecution alleged that he kidnapped a minor girl. The victim, aged 17, was later recovered and, in a statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, denied any abduction, stating she went with the petitioner of her own free will and had married him on 28‑03‑2025. The petitioner’s counsel relied on the Division Bench decision in Sahebi Khatoon (2010) that a girl aged 16‑17 may be treated as a major for consent purposes, and highlighted the petitioner’s clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the victim’s voluntary statement, the age‑assessment precedent, and the petitioner’s clean record, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order directs that the bail be effected if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences under Sections 96 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether a girl aged 17 is to be treated as a major for the purpose of consent under the kidnapping provisions.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS negates the criminal intent alleged by the prosecution.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the precedent in Sahebi Khatoon justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 183, 3(5), 96
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- minor consent
- Section 183 statement
- clean antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Sahebi Khatoon precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90378 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar S/o- Harendra Ray R/v- Lakshnipur Ps-
Muffasil Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XX S/o- YY R/v- Malutola Ps- Chiraiya Dist- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocates
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 24-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 96, 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner, along with
other accused persons named in the F.I.R., kidnapped minor
daughter of informant when she went to attend nature’s call.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. During investigation, the victim was
recovered and in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the
BNSS, she has denied the prosecution case and has categorically
stated that she went with the petitioner out of her own
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90378 of 2025(3) dt.24-03-2026
2/3
sweet will and has solemnized marriage on 28.03.2025. Age of
the vicitm is assessed as 17 years old. In this connection,
learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon order
of the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court dated 23.09.2010 in
Cr.W.J.C. No. 991 of 2010 (Sahebi Khatoon @ Sahebi Versus
State of Bihar and other) wherein this Court has directed to
treat a girl as major in case her age assessed to be between 16 to
17 years. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS
and clean antecedent of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, in the
event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from
today, let the above named petitioner 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 learned 6 th
District & Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special
Judge, POCSO Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection
with Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025, subject to condition as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90378 of 2025(3) dt.24-03-2026
3/3
Suraksha Sanhita.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…