Patna High Court
CR. MISC./39148/2026 of Pradeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 31 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39148 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2025 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pradeep Kumar S/O Jitendra Mukhiya R/O Vill.- Tinkoni, P.s- Darpa, District - East
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39148 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2025 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran ======================================================
Pradeep Kumar S/O Jitendra Mukhiya R/O Vill.- Tinkoni, P.s- Darpa, District
- East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar
2.
Sumitra Devi W/O Pramod Singh R/O Vill.- Tinkoni, P.s- Darpa, District - East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State
:
Mrs. Asha Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
31-07-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 174 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 137(2), 96 and 3 (5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 19.07.2025 by the informant, Sumitra Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that her minor daughter left the place alongwith ornament/cash. Later, came to know that the accused persons had taken her away. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a week’s delay in lodging of the F.I.R., he is a student, 20 years old and had no role to paly in the matter.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39148 of 2026(3) dt.31-07-2026
5. Earlier, the coordinate Bench called for the case diary and the statement of the victim girl which are on record. As per it, the girl narrated that she left on her own and went to Nepal. There she called the petitioner and married him. Later, call came that her father had lodged F.I.R. after which she returned.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts that the girl has not alleged anything against the petitioner as stated under section 183 of the B.N.S.S. that went on her own, this petitioner is a young boy having no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 7th District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 174 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:- Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39148 of 2026(3) dt.31-07-2026
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for cooperating in the investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U T