Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail as no specific allegation against him was made by the victim, establishing a prima facie case for bail.
Summary
Sonu Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging rape of a minor, the informant's granddaughter, under multiple statutes including the Bihar Penal Code, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Penal Code identified another accused, Ravindra Yadav, as the perpetrator and did not implicate Kumar. Kumar contended that the allegations against him were general and omnibus, and he had a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court observed that without any specific allegation by the victim against Kumar, there was no prima facie case to deny bail and therefore ordered his release on pre‑arrest bail subject to Section 482(2) of the Bihar Penal Code, directing the District Court to verify his antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether a pre‑arrest bail can be granted when the FIR contains general and omnibus allegations and the victim does not specifically accuse the petitioner.
- Whether the seriousness of offences under the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act precludes the grant of pre‑arrest bail.
- Applicability of Section 482(2) of the Bihar Penal Code in granting bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO Act
- SC/ST Act
- omnibus allegation
- Section 482
- victim statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12734 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-450 Year-2025 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Yadav, aged about 27 Yrs., (Male), Son of Rampati
Singh, Resident Of Village - Kirahi, P.O. - Kirahi, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. -
Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Son of YYY R/o Village - Kirhi, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parma Nand Singh, Advocate
For the Informant : Mrs. Shrishti Rani, Advocate
Mrs. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 28-04-2026 Heard Mr. Parma Nand Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mrs. Shrishti Rani,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and Mrs.
Usha Kumari 1, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Karakat P.S. Case No. 450 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 64, 115(2), 352, 351(2),
126(2) of the BNS, Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3
(1)(r), 3(v) (2) of the SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner
along with other co-accused persons, had allegedly committed
rape upon the minor grand daughter of the informant, who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12734 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
belongs to Scheduled Caste.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. General and omnibus
allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. The minor
victim girl, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the
BNSS has stated that co-accused Ravindra Yadav had
committed rape upon her and she has not supported that the
present petitioner had tried to commit rape with her. Petitioner
has clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioner seeks to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the FIR, I find that general and omnibus allegation has been
levelled against the petitioner. The minor victim girl, in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has given
information that co-accused Ravindra Yadav had committed
rape upon her and she has not supported that the present
petitioner had tried to commit rape with her. In absence of any
allegation made by the victim, I am of the opinion that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12734 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest
bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court where the
case is pending, in connection with Karakat P.S. Case No. 450
of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…