Manjit Yadav @ Manjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3711 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2025 Thana- LODIPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Manjit Yadav @ Manjit Kumar Son of Srikant Yadav @ Shreekant Yadav R/o village - Ward No.- 03, Navtoliya, P.S.- Pasraha, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sheela Devi Wife of Ramjanam Chaudhary R/o village - Agarpur, Pasi Tola, P.S.- Lodipur, Dist. - Bhagalpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Davendra Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP For the Informant/s :

Mr. Madan Mohan, Advocate Mr. Ritik Shah, Advocate Mr. Saurabh Suman, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Lodipur P.S. Case No. 213 of 2025 dated 14.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 96 of B.N.S. Subsequently added under Section 64(1) of B.N.S. and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant, aged about 16 years and a student of class-IXth, went out of the house saying that she would be coming from Aanganbadi and when the victim did not come home after a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3711 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 much long time, they started looking for and later on the informant learnt that she used to talk with a boy, namely, Manjit Yadav (petitioner). The informant stated that this petitioner enticed the victim and has kidnapped her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is palpably false. In view of her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., in which she has stated that she was in love with this petitioner and on her own sweet will, she has left the house and had performed marriage in the district of Khagaria. It has been submitted that there is no element of enticing or taking her away as provided under Section 137 B.N.S., so as to constitute offence under Section 96 B.N.S. The victim has also refused her medical examination by medical expert. It has been further submitted that she is not of such tender age rather she is on the verge of majority and out of such tender age, so as to not understand the consequences. It has been further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 19.09.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3711 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 and particularly the statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the petitioner above-named is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Bhagalpur in connection with Lodipur P.S. Case No. 213 of 2025.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T