Sunny Kumar @ Sanni Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42162 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2024 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Sunny Kumar @ Sanni Kumar S/O Devranjan Singh @ Devi Ranjan Singh Presently R/O- Jan Mahammadpur Ward NO-3, PS- Sarairanjan, DistrictSamastipur Permanent R/O- Dhanawan Dih,PS- Sarmedra, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kamli Devi W/O Muneshwar Das R/O- Jan Mahammadpur Ward NO-3, PSSarairanjan, District- Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State along with learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No.22/2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 323, 341, 324, 354(B), 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code & Sections 6, 4, 8 and 17 POCSO Act & Section 9 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that in sum and substance, the allegation against the petitioner is of kidnapping the minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years. It is next submitted that petitioner and the victim were in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42162 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/2 love and they had eloped but on the very next day the victim was recovered. It is further submitted that under parental pressure, the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she supported the case of the prosecution.

4. Learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. The learned APP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that even presuming what has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner to be true in that event also the victim is a minor aged about 15 years and even if she eloped on her own sweet will then also an offence has been committed by the petitioner as consent of a minor has no legal sanctity in the eye of law. It is also submitted that victim has supported the case of the prosecution.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T