Patna High Court
Satyendra BharativersusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyendra Bharati, was arrested in connection with a case involving alleged assault, intimidation, and offences under the IPC and the POCSO Act, with the alleged incident dated 15‑04‑2024 and the FIR filed on 01‑05‑2024. He has been in custody since 03‑01‑2025 and claims that the FIR is fabricated, the delay in filing indicates an after‑thought charge, and that he has a clean antecedent. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the charges. The court examined the delay, the petitioner’s clean record, and the nature of the allegations, and decided to grant bail on a cash bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the Additional Sessions Judge‑Special Judge in West Champaran.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the seriousness of the IPC and POCSO offences.
- Whether the fifteen‑day delay in filing the FIR and alleged fabrication affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 294, 34, 341, 354, 354A, 379, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 8
Subjects
- bail
- IPC offences
- POCSO Act
- delay in FIR
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11026 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2024 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Satyendra Bharati Son of Sri Surendra Ram Resident of Village - Badki
Devipur, P.S. - Dhanaha, Dist. - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX D/o XYZ R/o Village - Badki Devipur, P.S. - Dhanaha, Dist. - West
Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma
: Mr. Abhishek, Advocate
: Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 14-05-2026 Heard Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Despite valid service of notice, no one has appeared
on behalf of the OP No. 2.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
03.01.2025 in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 86 of
2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294, 354,
354A, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC of the BNS and Section 8 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on
01.05.2024, at about 08.15 p. m., the O. P. No. 2 submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11026 of 2026(5) dt.14-05-2026
2/5
written report before the S. H. O. of Dhanaha P. S alleging
therein that she was reading in class-8 in Government upgraded
Middle School, Gobarahiya, and used to go to school on foot.
On 15.04.2024, at about 9 a. m., while she was going to her
school, and reached near Bharwa village, the three accused
persons including the petitioner, who are her co-villagers, asked
her to stop, as they had some works with her, and when she
stopped, they started speaking indecent words, and Vinay
Kumar Sahani caught hold of her hands from behind, and Ajit
Kumar Gond and Satyendra Bharati started outraging her
modesty, and on protest by her, they gave out threatening. Vinay
Kumar Sahani assured her to marry. On alarm raised by her,
they left her breast, and fled away. They had previously
outraged her modesty 2-3 times, in respect of which, complaint
was made to their family-members. On 15.04.2024, Anand
Kumar Sahani, Gorakhlal Sahani, Ranjit Kumar Gond, Upendra
Ram all armed with lathi-danda and gun came to her house, and
while hurling abuses, and started committing marpit to her
brother Akash Sahani, and gave out threatening of lives, and of
lifting her sister, if incident was reported anywhere. Anand
Sahani took out Rs. 1500/- from the pocket of her brother. Since
she is an unmarried girl, she wanted to resolve the dispute with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11026 of 2026(5) dt.14-05-2026
3/5
intervention of responsible people of the village.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that as per the allegation
as alleged in the FIR the petitioner and accused persons have
misbehaved with the informant. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further submits that from perusal of the FIR it appears
that the date of occurrence is 15.04.2024 but the FIR has been
instituted on 01.05.2024 i.e., after a delay of fifteen days
without giving any explanation of delay which suggests that it is
an afterthought FIR instituted so as to implicate the petitioner
falsely in the present case. It is next submitted that it appears
from the FIR itself that except the misbehavior no other
allegation in the FIR has been alleged against the petitioner and
the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet and
petitioner is in custody since 03.01.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11026 of 2026(5) dt.14-05-2026
4/5
and that petitioner has clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above
named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VII-cum-Special Judge, under POCSO Act, West
Champaran at Bettiah in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No.
86 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11026 of 2026(5) dt.14-05-2026
5/5
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.