Patna High Court
Chandrashekhar Thakur @ Chandrashekhar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandrashekhar Thakur, was arrested on 29 November 2025 in connection with a case registered under Section 64 of the BNS for alleged forcible rape. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was fabricated. The State opposed the bail, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, which supported the prosecution’s case. The court examined the seriousness of the allegation and the victim’s corroborated statement. Considering the nature of the offence and the victim’s testimony, the court declined to grant bail. The petition for bail was therefore refused.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate decision on the bail application in a rape case under Section 64 of the BNS, given the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023?
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 64
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 183
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- victim statement
- Section 183
- criminal procedure
- high court
- denial of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11205 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2025 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Chandrashekhar Thakur @ Chandrashekhar Kumar S/o Vishwanath Thakur
R/o Village - Muraitha, P.S - Jalley, District - Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Jyoti Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard Ms.Jyoti Kumari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
29.11.2025 in connection with Jalley P.S. Case No. 227 of 2025,
F.I.R. dated 28.11.2025 registered for the offence punishable
under Section 64 of BNS.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he forcibly
committed rape with the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation
as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11205 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/2
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under
Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 in which she has fully supported the
case of the prosecution, apart from that, she has stated that on
29.11.2025 she has gone for her medical examination but due to
intervention of the police, the medical examination of the victim
had not been by the prosecution and she has stated everything in
her statement under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and nature of
allegation against the petitioner supported by the victim in her
statement under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, I am not inclined
to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Jalley P.S.
Case No. 227 of 2025 pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-
I, Darbhanga.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…