Patna High CourtCR. MISC./89153/2025bail rejected

Krishna Kumar Sahu @ Sri Krishna Sahu @ Sri Krishna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-11Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89153 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- KALUAHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Krishna Kumar Sahu @ Sri Krishna Sahu @ Sri Krishna Kumar Son of Ram Chandra Sahu @ Chanar Sahu Resident of Village - Haripur Bakshi Tol, P.S. - Kaluahi, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

XXX Son of YYY R/o Village and P.O. - Haripur Dih Tola, P.S. - Haripur, P.S. - Kaluahi, Dist. - Madhubani.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate for the O.P. No.2 :

Mr.Dharmveer, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binay Krishna, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kaluahi P.S. case No. 24 of 2025 (G.R. No. 314 of 2025) instituted for the offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 96, 98 and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sections 3(2)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act and Section 8, 12 and 18 of the POCSO Act.

3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has been withdrawn vide order dated 20.11.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 3704 of 2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89153 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026 2/3

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that petitioner along with other co-accused had taken away the daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that occurrence took place on 12.02.2025, whereas F.I.R. has been instituted on 16.02.2025. There is love affection between the victim and the petitioner and she herself went with the petitioner according to her sweet will. He further submitted that in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 of BNSS, she has stated that petitioner has never committed any wrong act with her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 11.03.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has corroborated the contents of the FIR and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. The I.O of this case after completion of the investigation submitted Chargesheet u/s

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89153 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026 3/3 137(2), 87, 74, 96, 98 and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sections 8, 12 and 18 of the POCSO Act and section 3(2) (w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

9. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T