Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15679/2026bail granted

Prahlad Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-12Mr. Justice Ajit Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15679 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2024 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Prahlad kumar Son of Mahesh Bari Resident of village -Gangwara Kranti chowk P.S- sadar District -Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 198 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 2082 of 2024, F.I.R dated 13.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant and his family went for sleeping and her daughter went for bathroom but she did not return, then her family members found that she was missing and claimed that her daughter was taken away by one co-accused person, namely, Manish Kumar as her family members seen the co-accused nearby his house earlier.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

2/4 victim herself has recorded the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, that she herself went with the co-accused Manish Kumar, as she was in love with him. It is also submitted by referring to the statement made in the anticipatory bail petition that it is her candid statement of the victim girl that the petitioner has not committed any wrong act with her. It is next submitted that the petitioner is a man of means and has clean antecedents, while the co-accused, Manish Kumar, with whom the victim is said to have gone away from her lawful guardianship has already been extended the privilege of regular bail, and on this strength, the petitioner seeks the privilege of anticipatory bail, as there is nothing incriminating that has been said by the victim against this petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the fact that the co-accused, Manish Kumar, has already been extended the privilege of bail, and the main co-accused with whom the victim, is said to have eloped away, has already been extended the privilege of bail and nothing incriminating has been said against the petitioner by the victim with regard to any wrong act having been done to her. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of

3/4 anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, the learned court concerned is directed to verify such a statement of the counsel of the petitioner from the statement so recorded by the victim, which is recorded under Section 183 of BNSS.

7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. 1st Madhubani in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 198 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 2082 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner(s) 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/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

4/4 (iii) the petitioner(s) 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;

(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) abhishekkr/- U T