Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80000 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR RAIL P.S. DistrictSaran ====================================================== Arvind Kumar S/o Rampukar Mahto RO village- Thatiya Belordih, Ward No 1, PS- Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sonu Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered forthe offence punishable under Section 79 of J.J. Act and u/s 3 and 14 of the Child Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant along with other police officials on getting confidential information about human trafficking reached Muzaffarpur Platform and found some feared children seated in the train. On enquiring they disclose that accused persons including petitioner were taking the children to Vijaywada for work of an under construction over bridge.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80000 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation of trafficking of children made under section 143 (5) of BNS for the purposes of getting labour work done from them is absolutely false and concocted and as a matter of fact the petitioner himself is a student and he was going to his father when the parents of the adolescent victim had asked him to take them along with him to his father's place for the purposes of some employment opportunities for them. It is also pointed out that the children were aged about 15-16 years for whom even according to Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 employment at Hazardous places is only prohibited and not that any other employment is prohibited.
In any view of the matter, the petitioner was only trying to help the parents of these children and this fact has been supported by the statement of the children recorded during course of investigation in paragraph nos. 72 to 77 where they have clearly stated that no allurement was provided by the petitioner in this regard. Further the petitioner, having no criminal antecedent, is in custody since 09.09.2025 and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State indicates that the charges have already been framed on 18.12.2025 and the case is now at the stage of prosecution evidence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80000 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026 3/3
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the grant of bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and considering the fact that the petitioner was only taking the children along with him to his father's house and there is no complaint during course of investigation by parents of such children and further charges have already been framed, let the above named petitioner, be released 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 /concerned Court below in connection with Muzaffarpur G.R. P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025/concerned court below.
7. It is pointed out that the case is now pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-17, Muzaffarpur and as such the bail bonds shall be furnished at the place where the case is presently pending.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Ranjeet/- U T