SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3406

PATNA HIGH COURT
PARTHA SARTHY, J
Rahul Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75396 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ravi Shankar
For the Respondents: Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, Mr. Nilanjan Chatterjee

The consent of a minor holds no legal value in kidnapping cases, even if the minor expresses love for the accused.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks regular bail in Atri P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025 under sections 87 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, accused of kidnapping a minor. The court, after considering the victim’s retraction of allegations and the petitioner’s clean history, finds grounds for bail, emphasizing that the victim's consent holds no legal weight due to her age. The court grants bail under specified conditions.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Atri P.S. Case no. 230 of 2025 registered under section 87 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the 17 year old minor daughter of the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner for the purpose of marriage. Hence the instant case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The daughter of the informant who was a major returned and her statement was recorded under section 183 B.N.S.S. wherein she has not supported the prosecution case. She has categorically stated therein that she called the petitioner with whom she was in love, they married and also have an issue out of the said wedlock. The petitioner is in custody since 20.6.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and there is direct allegation against him of having kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant. The victim has been described to be a minor on the basis of the age in the government documents which has came in paragraph no. 47 of the case diary. The consent of a minor has no legal value.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 B.N.S.S., the petitioner having remained in custody for seven months since 20.6.2025 and chargesheet having been submitted in the case, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Atri P.S. Case no. 230 of 2025 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Gaya.

(Partha Sarthy, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top