Chandan Kumar Yadav @ Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87260 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-697 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Son of Virendra Prasad Yadav @ Birendra Prasad Yadav Resident of Village- Ranjitpur, Ward No. 7, P.S.- Punaura, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anant Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 697 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 87 and 137(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the petitioner has kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that during the course of investigation, the victim has given her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, wherein she has stated that she was on talking terms with the petitioner. The petitioner is her boyfriend and she wanted to marry

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87260 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 him, i.e., why she left her house without disclosing it to anyone, and with the petitioner, she went to Muzaffarpur and from Muzaffarpur, both of them went to Kolkata. They lived there for 23 days, and after she came to know regarding the case, they returned. He further submits that from perusal of the statement of the victim, it is clear that she has gone with the petitioner on her own sweet will. No force was used, or she was enticed anyway. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.10.2025.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, (POCSO) Act, Sitamarhi in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 697 of 2025. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T