IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13612 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-821 Year-2025 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Ashutosh Kumar @ Golu Kumar Son of Rajan Chaudhary @ Rajan Chaudhry Resident Of Village- sonbarsha Police Station-jogapatti District-west Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. XXX Wife of YYY Resident Of Village- Majhariya Sekh, Ps- Majhauliya, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 3 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 821 of 2025, dated 22.11.2025, lodged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 87, 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”). 3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against 10 named accused persons, including the present petitioner, with an allegation that the accused persons, namely Sandeep Kumar, Golu Kumar (petitioner), and Adarsh Kumar, entered the informant’s house and tried to take away the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13612 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026 2/4 informant’s daughter. Upon the informant’ daughter raising alarm, when she came out, two of the accused persons fled away, but Sandeep Kumar was caught. Thereafter, all the accused persons came armed with lathi and rod to get Sandeep Kumar released from the custody of the informant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel further submits that the said Sandeep Kumar was in love with the informant’s daughter and, upon her call, he entered the house, subsequently, when the alleged victim was caught by her mother, she changed her statement. Counsel further submits that the case diary has been called for and the chats which took place between the alleged victim and Sandeep Kumar form part of the case diary. Counsel further submits that the statement under Section 183 of the BNSS has also been called for and the said statement is in sharp contradiction with the allegations made in the fardbeyan. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is aged about 19 years, and this aspect may also be taken into consideration. 5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR, though he is alleged to have fled away from Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13612 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026 3/4 the place of occurrence, however, his involvement cannot be denied. Counsel further submits that on the previous occasion, the case diary and the statement under Section 183 of the BNSS have also been called for. 6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that, in the case diary, the entire chat which took place between the accused Sandeep Kumar and the alleged victim has been incorporated. Counsel further submits that from the said chat, it transpires that the alleged victim had instigated her friend to come to her house, and thereafter the said Sandeep Kumar went with his friends and entered the house, but only Sandeep Kumar was caught, while the others fled away. 7. Upon perusal of the statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, it transpires to this Court that the victim has made allegations against three persons, including the present petitioner, however, the said statement is in sharp contradiction with the fardbeyan, which indicates something different. 8. It further transpires to this Court that if the fardbeyan is to be relied upon, the Section 183 of the BNSS statement cannot be relied upon, and if the Section 183 of the BNSS statement is to be relied upon, then the fardbeyan cannot Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13612 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026 4/4 be relied upon. In this background, doubts arise in the mind of the Court, and when such doubts arise, they are to be resolved in favour of the accused. 9. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of this case, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of District & Additional Sessions Judge 6th cum Special Judge, POCSO, Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 821 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. Aman Kumar/- (Dr. Anshuman, J.) U T