Patna High Court
Munarik Turiya @ Mundrik TuriyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The bail application was dismissed; the petitioner was not entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Munarik Turiya, was arrested on 8 April 2023 in connection with a 2021 case alleging that he, along with others, attempted to rape a minor girl under Sections 376(A), 376(B), 376(D) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The victim’s statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., and medical evidence corroborated the allegations. The petitioner had previously applied for bail in 2023 and 2024, both of which were rejected. The trial court report indicated that the trial was underway, with two of six prosecution witnesses already examined. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the victim’s testimony, and the ongoing trial, the High Court refused the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with rape of a minor under the IPC and POCSO Act when the trial is in progress.
- Whether the nature of the evidence and the stage of trial justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376A, 376B, 376D
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- child sexual abuse
- POCSO Act
- IPC
- Criminal Procedure Code
- trial delay
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11231 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2021 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Munarik Turiya @ Mundrik Turiya Son of Arjun Turiya Resident of Village-
Harkuhra, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mina Devi Wife of Bindeshwar Turiya Resident of Village- Harkuhra, P.S.-
Fatehpur, District- Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 01-05-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel
for the petitioner, Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the
informant and Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
08.04.2023 in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 188 of
2021, F.I.R. dated 09.06.2021 registered for the offence under
Sections 376(A B) and 376(D) of IPC and Section 6 of the
POCSO Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
21.05.2021, the informant’s daughter was allegedly taken by the
accused persons while she went outside at night, and they
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11231 of 2026(4) dt.01-05-2026
2/3
attempted to rape her. She was later found the next morning at a
house, where she reported body pain and stated that the accused
had threatened her not to disclose the incident.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this
Court vide order dated 20.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
50733 of 2023. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved befoe
this Hon’ble Court for grant of regular bail in Cr. Misc. No.
48338 of 2024 but the same was dismissed vide order dated
18.10.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is in custody since 08.04.2023 and the trial is not in
progress.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that statement of the victim was recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C./183 of the BNSS in which she has categorically
stated that the petitioner along with other accused persons have
committed rape upon her. He further submits that date of birth
of the victim is recorded as 20.09.2019 in paragraph 55 of the
case diary which suggests that the victim was minor at the time
of occurrence. The medical report also supports the allegation as
alleged in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11231 of 2026(4) dt.01-05-2026
3/3
6. Vide order dated 18.03.2026, a report was called for
with regard to the stage of the trial. Report dated 20.04.2026 of
the learned trial court reveals that the trial is going on and out of
six prosecution witnesses, two witnesses have already been
examined.
6. Considering the nature of allegation, the FIR
supported by the victim, medical evidence as well as report of
the trial court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail
in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 188 of 2021 pending
in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special
Judge of POCSO Act, Gaya.
7. Prayer is refused.
8. However, the learned trial court is directed to
expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Abhishek/-
U T
Checking your session…