Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17896 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2021 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Arvind Kumar son of Harinarayan Mahto Resident of village- Tilangi, PSSonbarsa, Dist- Sitarmarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Gautam Sharma Son of Sobodh Sharma Resident of village- Haribela, PSBathnaha, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the office report dated 12.06.2026, it would manifest that opposite party no. 2 personally received the notice but then after receiving the notice, the opposite party no. 2 chooses not to appear and contest. It is further submitted that the informant alleges that his minor sister was kidnapped by the accused person including the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17896 of 2026(4) dt.18-06-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that petitioner and the victim were in love and they eloped. It is next submitted that informant only with a view to give seriousness to the case falsely alleged that the victim is a minor when she is a major. It is also submitted that petitioner and the victim have performed their marriage and are living together and out of the wedlock, a child was born. It is, thus, submitted that this perhaps explains why the opposite party no. 2, despite receiving the notice, chooses not to appear and contest. It is further submitted that the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 performed their marriage at Arya Samaj Sewa Trust (Regd.), 106, Rajindra Market, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi and in the said certificate of marriage, the victim has disclosed her age as 01.01.2005.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17896 of 2026(4) dt.18-06-2026 3/3 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 348 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T