Allowed

Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Apr 2026CR. MISC./5088/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in a POCSO case alleging he abducted a minor on the pretext of marriage. The victim's BNSS Section 183 statement showed she left with him voluntarily in a consensual relationship. Pre-arrest bail was granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000 with two like sureties before Special Judge, POCSO, Bettiah, within four weeks, subject to Section 482(2) BNSS.

Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar Vs… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5088 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar, Gender, Male, aged about 23 years, S/o Chandi Ram R/o Village - Ward no. 01, Khairwa Tola, P.S - Chanpatia, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

XXXX Gender, Female, aged about 17 years, D/o YYYY R/o Village - Ward No. 1, Khairwa Tola, P.S - Sirisiya, District - West Champaran

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

======================================================

¶10

Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Renu Kumari, APP

¶12

======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 06-04-2026

¶15

At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶16

the petitioner seeks to delete para no.14 of the bail petition in course of the day.

¶17

Permission is accorded.

¶18

Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.

¶19

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 64, 96 and 137(2) of the BNS and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶20

As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioner on the pretext of marriage has established physical relationship with the informant.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/4

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he was in love relationship with the victim and has not forcibly kidnapped her, rather the victim girl willingly went with the petitioner and the said fact is evident as the informant has admitted in the FIR that no force was put to her to accompany along with the petitioner to go to Chandigarh and the very allegation that the petitioner had forced and kidnapped her does not sustain. From perusal of the FIR, it is apparent that both parties were in relationship for quite some time and enjoyed each other’s company for months together. The relationship was consensual. Learned counsel further submitted mother of the petitioner had lodged case against the father of the present informant and the informant was putting pressure on the petitioner to marry with her and lastly when she could not become successful in persuading the petitioner to marry with her, she on the advise of her parents has lodged the present case against the petitioner on basis of the frivolous allegation.

¶23

Mr. Ram Kishun Prasad, learned counsel, has tendered his appearance on behalf of the informant and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail. He submitted that the petitioner has committed crime with the

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/4

¶25

informant by establishing unnatural sex with her and also subjected her to cruelty and assault and, as such, he don’t deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶26

Learned APP for the State also vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶27

Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on record, it appears that the allegation against the petitioner is of abducting the informant who is minor with an intent to marry her. However, it transpires from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS that she has categorically stated that she had gone with the petitioner without any force, coercion or inducement. The parties were in a consensual love relationship prior to the alleged occurrence. It is well settled that the statement of the alleged victim is required to be given due weight and consideration.

¶28

In case of State of U.P. vs. Anirudh & Anr . reported in 2026 LiveLaw(SC)29 , the Apex Court has observed that where the relationship between the parties appears to be consensual and founded on mutual affection, the same is a relevant factor to be borne in mind while considering matters relating to bail and prosecution. In the present case, the victim,

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5088 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 4/4

¶30

in her statement, has indicated that she had gone with the petitioner without any force, coercion or inducement. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has, prima facie , made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO-cum-District and Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bettiah, West Champaran / Concerned Court in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶31

The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.

¶32

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶33

Sanjay/-

Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basant Kumar Ram @ Basant Ram @ Basant Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaushal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Vs The State of Bihar

Mulendra Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Parmeshwar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Basudev Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sikandar Mali Vs The State of Bihar