Patna High Court
Shyamal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court refused bail, holding that the seriousness of the rape allegation and the victim’s statement preclude the grant of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Shyamal Kumar, was arrested on 22 May 2025 in connection with FIR No. 96 of 2025 alleging rape and threats to kill the victim under Section 64 of the BNS, 2023. The prosecution presented the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, affirming the allegations. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he has a clean record and that the FIR is fabricated, seeking bail. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charge and the victim’s recorded statement. The Court, considering the nature of the allegation and the supporting statement, declined to grant bail, refusing the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case under Section 64 of the BNS, 2023, given the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 64
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 183
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- Section 64
- Section 183
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1136 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar
======================================================
Shyamal Kumar S/o- Anjan Mahaldar R/v- Balthi Maheshpur, Ward no 3, PS-
Kursela, Distt- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
22.05.2025 in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 96 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 21.05.2025 for the offences punishable under
Section 64 of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner has
committed rape upon the victim and also threatened to kill her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1136 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/2
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under
Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 in which she has stated that the
petitioner has committed rape upon her.
6. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in
the FIR supported by the statement of the victim recorded under
Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 96 of
2025 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Katihar.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…