Sunil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70643 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHNAUR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Sunil Yadav S/O Kisun Yadav @ Bauku Yadav R/O Vill - Sonere, P.S - Lakhanour,Dist- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kaila Saday S/o Late Chuman Saday R/O Vill.- Kachuvi, ward no.- 03. P.SLakhnaur, Dist- Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pravashankar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. However, despite service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections363/366 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act was added.

3. Petitioner along with other accused persons are said to have abducted the grand daughter of the informant with intention to marry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First Information Report has been lodged after delay of 50 days by the grandfather of the victim stating that the petitioner Sunil Yadav had kidnapped the victim girl with the purposes of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70643 of 2025(3) dt.19-02-2026 2/2 marriage. It is also an admitted fact that the victim is aged about 17 years which is almost on the verge of majority and in her statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. she has accepted that she was in love relationship with the petitioner and she had ran away to his house whereafter both had gone to Delhi where they married each other. The petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2024 with no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. coupled with the fact that there has been long custody of the petitioner and the charges have been framed on 14.11.2025, let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Lakhnaur P.S. Case No. 97 of 2024.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T