Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pratima DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

In the absence of specific allegations against the petitioner and given her clean antecedents, the Court held that anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC may be granted subject to prescribed conditions.

Summary

Pratima Devi applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a POCSO case where she was alleged to have facilitated a rape by calling the victim out of her house, after which Sudhanshu Kumar allegedly committed the offence. The prosecution alleged offences under Sections 65(1), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, but there was no specific allegation against the petitioner herself. The petitioner asserted her innocence, clean antecedents and that the main accusation was against the alleged rapist. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the charges. The Court, after considering the lack of direct incriminating material against the petitioner, allowed the anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482 of the B.N.S.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under the POCSO Act and B.N.S.
  • Whether the prosecution has sufficient material to justify denial of anticipatory bail against the petitioner
  • Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedents and lack of specific allegations warrant the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • POCSO Act
  • rape
  • false implication
  • bail conditions
  • Criminal Procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11116 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka
                 ======================================================
                 Pratima Devi W/O Pawan Mandal R/O Village- Shasan, P.S- Dhoraiya, Distt.-
                 Banka.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X D/O- Y R/O Village- Shasan, P.S- Dhoraiya, Distt.- Banka.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Brij Nandan Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in

                   connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 01 of 2025 registered

                   for the offence under Sections 65(1), 351(2), 3(5) of B.N.S. and

                   Section 4 of the POCSO Act

                                   3.    As per the prosecution case,               petitioner is

                   alleged to have called the victim out of her house and then after

                   sometime, one Sudhanshu Kumar committed rape upon her.

                                    4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for

                   the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and she has falsely

                   been implicated in the case. It is next submitted that petitioner is

                   a woman and the main allegation is against one Sudhanshu
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11116 of 2026(2) dt.18-02-2026
                                                          2/2




                        Kumar of committing rape upon the girl and there is no specific

                        allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

                                          5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer

                        for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                        6. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application

                        is allowed.

                                        7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of

                        her arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within

                        four weeks from today, 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 Court of

                        Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum- Special Judge, POCSO,

                        Banka/ concerned Court below in connection with Dhoraiya P.S.

                        Case No. 01 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in

                        Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 /

                        Section 482 of the BNSS.



                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.