Patna High Court
Vikram Yadav @ Vikram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court denied bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the alleged POCSO offences and the minor status of the victim preclude the grant of bail.
Summary
Vikram Yadav was arrested on 16 October 2025 in connection with a case registered under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, alleging that he abducted and had sexual intercourse with a minor girl. The petitioner contended that the FIR was fabricated, the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 did not support the prosecution, and that he had committed no offence. The State argued that the victim, born on 1 January 2010, was a minor at the time of the alleged incident on 6 October 2025, and that any consent by a minor is legally invalid, with the victim’s statement indicating a physical relationship. The Court examined the seriousness of the POCSO allegations and the victim’s age, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the petition for bail was refused.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged offences under the POCSO Act and BNS provisions.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, negates the necessity for bail.
- Whether the alleged consent of a minor is legally valid under the POCSO Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNS) Act — s. 137(2), 64, 96
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- consent
- abduction
- criminal procedure
- Section 183 BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12604 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- Gurupa District- Gaya
======================================================
Vikram Yadav @ Vikram Kumar Son of Deba Yadav @ Devnandan Yadav
Resident of Village- Dundu, P.S.- Gurpa, District- Gaya... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Wife of XX Resident of Village- Dundu, P.S.- Gurpa, District- Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 Heard Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh,learned counsel for the
informant and Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
16.10.2025 in connection with Gurpa P.S. Case No. 150 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 09.10.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 137(2),96 of BNS but the chargesheet
has been submitted under Sections 64,137(2),96 of BNS and
Sections 4/6 of POCSO Act.
3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner is that
he with the help of other co-accused taken away the victim girl.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12604 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/2
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR and the victim was recovered and her
statement was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 in
which she has not supported the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2010 which suggests that on
the date of occurrence i.e. 06.10.2025 the victim was minor and
consent of the minor is no consent in the eye of law, apart from
that, from a bare perusal of the statement of the victim under
Section 183 of BNSS which suggests that the petitioner has
made physical relation with her.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to
enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Gurpa P.S.
Case No. 150 of 2025, pending in the court of learned Exclusive
Special Judge, POCSO-cum-Additional Sessions Judge -VI,
Gaya Jee.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…