Sonu Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33053 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2024 Thana- PARANDABAR District- Nawada ====================================================== Sonu Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar S/o Suresh Prasad Yadav Resident Of VillageManjhagawan, Ps- Parnadabar, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XXX YYY R/o vill - Jaynagar, P.S.- Parnadabar, Distt.- Nawada ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Parnadabar P.S. Case No. 169 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 137(2), 96 of BNS and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 27.01.2026.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is to kidnap the minor daughter of informant aged about 14 years for the purpose of illicit intercourse/ marriage with another person.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that daughter of informant was in love with this petitioner and as their love affair was not approved

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33053 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026 2/3 by parents of the victim, the present false case was lodged. It is submitted that this fact can be gathered from the statement of victim as recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, where she categorically stated that she was in love with this petitioner since last two years and when the relationship with this petitioner was objected by her parents she left her parents home and accompanied petitioner on her own, whereafter both solemnized their marriage and started living as wife and husband. It is submitted by learned counsel that just to create pressure the victim slightly twisted her statement in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS giving an impression that she was kidnapped by this petitioner.

6. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation of this case is completed, for which chargesheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. It is submitted that progress of trial is slow and same is not likely to conclude within prescribed time period as provisioned under Section 35(2) of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33053 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026 3/3 POCSO Act.

7.Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

8. Despite of valid service of notice as same received by mother, none appeared on behalf of O.P. No. 2

9. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as major contradictions from statements of the victim qua occurrence can be gathered out of her statement recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS, coupled with fact as trial of this case is not likely to conclude within near future, accordingly petitioner above named who is in custody since 27.01.2026, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Parnadabar P.S. Case No. 169 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge cum Spl. Judge, POCSO Act, Nawada/concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 480(3) of BNSS. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Sudha/- U T