Abhimanyu Kumar @ Mannu @ Abhimanu Kr. v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25563 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2023 Thana- KISHANGANJ District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Abhimanyu Kumar @ Mannu @ Abhimanu Kr. S/O Krishna Prasad R/O Village-Son Nagar Bhuiyan Tola, PS- Barun, District- Aurangabad, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-07-2026 Heard Mr. Ram Parwesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 253 of 2023, registered for the offenses punishable under Section 366/34 of the I.P.C.
3. Allegedly the informant's daughter went missing while she had gone to her college along with her friends; when she did not return till the evening, the informant tried to contact her but could not find out her whereabouts, leading to institution of the present case.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the FIR has been instituted against unknown miscreants but later on, the victim was recovered and her statement was recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, wherein she has made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25563 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026 2/3 a contradictory statement, besides she has stated that both the victim and the petitioner were known to each other and at railway platform this petitioner had offered drinking water and later on, she lost her conscience. But surprisingly, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, she has made an exaggerated allegation that she was subjected to sexual relationship and threatened with dire consequences, besides she was taken to various places. The entire statement of the victim is said to be concocted and due to surmountable pressure led by her parents. The petitioner is said to be a married person having fair antecedent and, as such, there is no likelihood that he would commit this crime is the contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that bare perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, it appears that she was subjected to torture and this petitioner has forcibly committed rape upon her, who was the minor as per the medical evidence.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25563 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026 3/3 BNSS, as well as medical report, it clearly suggests that the victim was a minor and she disclosed that she had been subjected to forcible relationship, besides other serious allegation, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected. (Harish Kumar, J) siddharth/- U T