Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Md. Musowir, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 20-04-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

2 . The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Korha P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

¶15

3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have abducted the informant’s daughter (the victim), aged about 16 years. Due to social pressure, she returned, however, on 07.11.2025, when the victim had gone to a grocery shop, the petitioner with the help of four other person again abducted her and the victim was carrying a cash amount of Rs. 80,000/-. When the informant reached the petitioner’s house, the petitioner neither allowed her to speak with the victim nor

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14120 of 2026(4) dt.20-04-2026 2/3

¶17

returned the money, instead, he pushed the informant out of the house.

¶18

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, which was called for by the order dated 12.03.2026 indicates that the victim left her house on her own and thereafter joined the company of the petitioner of her own free will, and ultimately both solemnized their marriage. She has categorically stated that the petitioner did not misbehave with her in any manner and did not take her forcibly. It has also been submitted that there was no element of “enticing away” or “taking away” so as to constitute an offences under Section 96 of the BNS. Moreover, the victim girl is on the verge of attaining majority and she was not of such tender age so as to not understand the consequences of her action. It has been submitted at the bar that the charges have not been framed. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has clean criminal antecedent and is in custody since 09.12.2024.

¶19

5 . Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14120 of 2026(4) dt.20-04-2026 3/3

¶22

parties and particularly the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., let the petitioner abovenamed, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned,

¶23

Katihar, in connection with Korha P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024.

¶24

7. The application stands allowed.

¶25

(Praveen Kumar, J)

¶26

Jyoti/-

¶27

U T

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prince Kumar @ Sahil Vs The State of Bihar

Anand Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Kumar Yadav @ Niraj kr. Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Santu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar