Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Chhotu Bhagat @ Chhotu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail, holding that the allegations of kidnapping and forced sexual intercourse with a minor warranted denial of bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Chhotu Bhagat, sought anticipatory bail in a case where he was alleged to have kidnapped and forcibly sexually assaulted the informant's daughter, who was a minor at the time of the incident. The FIR, lodged eleven days after the alleged offence, charged him under Sections 96, 352, 351(2)(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S, and the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S indicated forced relocation to Delhi and sexual assault. The petitioner argued that the victim was in love with him, had voluntarily joined his company, and later altered her statement, asserting no prior criminal record. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the victim’s minority. After considering the facts, the Court found the allegations credible and the offences grave, and consequently dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner given the seriousness of the offences and the victim being a minor
  • Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the change in the victim's statement affect the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • kidnapping
  • sexual assault
  • minor
  • FIR delay
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Section 438
  • Section 96 B.N.S
  • Section 352 B.N.S
  • Section 351(2)(3) B.N.S
  • Section 3(5) B.N.S
  • Section 183 B.N.S.S

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9635 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2025 Thana- GORADIH District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Chhotu Bhagat @ Chhotu Kumar S/O Ashok Bhagat R/O Village- Goradih,
                 P.S- Goradih, Distt.- Bhagalpur.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Vivekanand Vivek, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   22-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in

                   connection with Goradih P.S. Case No. 148 of 2025 dated

                   14.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section

                   96, 352, 351(2)(3) and 3(5) of B.N.S

                               3. As per the allegation, the daughter of the informant

                   went to school for getting a certificate and in the meantime, the

                   FIR named accused persons including this petitioner kidnapped

                   the informant’s daughter. When the informant went to the house

                   of this petitioner, co-accused Ashok Bhagat and this petitioner

                   threatened and abused her.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

                   that there is a delay of eleven days in lodging the FIR and the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9635 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     victim was actually in love with this petitioner and has joined

                     her company wilfully. After her recovery and going into the

                     hand of the informant and the police she has changed her

                     statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. The petitioner has got no

                     criminal antecedent.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                  6. Heard the parties and perused the record, the

                     impugned order goes to show that the victim was below 18

                     years on the date of occurrence and as per her statement

                     recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., this petitioner had

                     forcibly taken her to Delhi and had made physical relation with

                     her forcibly.

                                  7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to

                     the petitioner and the same is accordingly dismissed.



                                                (Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-

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.