Patna High Court
Bhola Kumar @ Aman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner with conditions, holding that the victim’s non‑supportive statement and prior anticipatory bail warrant release.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhola Kumar (also known as Aman Kumar), was arrested on charges of kidnapping a minor girl, the daughter of the informant, under Sections 365, 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. He has been in custody since 22 October 2025 and claims that the victim, who eloped with him on 6 February 2024, gave a statement under Section 164 of the CrPC that does not support the prosecution. The petitioner also relied on a prior order granting anticipatory bail on 23 October 2024, noting that the case was not filed under Section 376 IPC. The State opposed regular bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the victim’s statement and the earlier anticipatory bail, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to the condition that the trial court may cancel bail if he attempts to delay framing of charge or the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused charged with kidnapping and sexual offences under the IPC and POCSO Act despite the seriousness of the charges
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC and the earlier anticipatory bail order justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 365, 366A, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 8
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- POCSO
- anticipatory bail
- Section 164 statement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91931 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2024 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Bhola Kumar @ Aman Kumar Son of Satrudhan Ray @ Satrohan Ray @
Shatrodhan Ray @ Shatrughan Rai @ Santo Rai @ Satto Ray Resident of
Village - Kushail, P.S. - Pupari, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o - Late Mohan Rai R/O Village - Kusail, P.S. - Pupai, Dist-Sitamarhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 365 and 366(A)/34 of the
Indian Penal Code as well as Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and is in custody since
22.10.2025. It is further submitted that in sum and substance,
the allegation is of kidnapping the minor daughter of the
informant. It is next submitted that the victim and the petitioner
were in love and they eloped on 06.02.2024 and thereafter the
FIR came to be instituted on 04.04.2025. It is also submitted
that the victim came back and her statement was recorded under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91931 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2026
2/3
Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has not supported the case of
the prosecution. It is further submitted that earlier the father and
the brother of the petitioner had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 66267 of 2024 and the
same was allowed by an order dated 23.10.2024 wherein this
fact was taken note of that victim did not support the case of the
prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
and the case was not instituted under Section 376 of the Indian
Penal Code. It is next submitted that if the privilege of bail is
granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather
will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
regular bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions aforesaid, the
petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Trial Court where the case is pending in connection
with Pupari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2024.
6. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial
court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after his release on
bail, is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91931 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2026
3/3
charge is trying to delay the trial of the case in any manner in
both the conditions the learned trial court shall be at liberty to
cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…