Patna High Court
SHUBHAM KUMAR SAHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bail bond with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Shubham Kumar Sah, was charged under Sections 64, 61(2), 81, 318 and 340 of the B.N.S. and Sections 67/67(A) of the Information Technology Act for allegedly offering a drink that rendered a woman unconscious, raping her, and recording the act, as well as sending obscene videos thereafter. He applied for regular bail, claiming innocence and alleging that the complaint was filed a year after the alleged incident to harass him, noting a prior similar cyber case where he was already on bail. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the rape allegation and the delay in filing the complaint. The court examined the delay, the nature of the allegations, and the petitioner's custodial status since November 2025. Concluding that bail was appropriate under the circumstances, the court ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted in a rape case where the complaint is filed after a one‑year delay.
- Whether the prior cyber case and the alleged motive to incarcerate the petitioner affect the bail decision.
- Whether the allegations under the B.N.S. and IT Act warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 318, 340, 61(2), 64, 81
- Information Technology Act — s. 67, 67(A)
Subjects
- regular bail
- rape
- sexual assault
- delay in filing complaint
- Information Technology Act
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13236 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Shubham Kumar Sah, S/o Dinesh Sah @ Dinesh Shaw, Resident of Village -
Beuni Andama, Police Station- Fekla, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections64, 61(2),
81, 318 and 340 of the B.N.S. and Section 67/67(A) of the I.T.
Act.
3. The case of the prosecution based on complaint
petition, in short, is that the petitioner who is relative offered
Maaza juice to the complainant and after consuming the same,
she got unconscious and the petitioner established forceful
physical relationship with her and also made video of the act. A
Panchayati was also held for that. It is further alleged that the
marriage of the complainant was solemnized with one Pravin
Sah and after that, the petitioner has sent obscene videos on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13236 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
mobile of the husband of the complainant and on facebook and
on Instagram.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from
perusal of his supplementary affidavit, it will transpire that
prior to this case, the complainant of this case has filed a Cyber
P.S. Case No. 66 of 2024 with similar nature of the allegation
but in this case, she has added the allegation of rape also. It has
further been submitted that in that case i.e. earlier case,
petitioner is on bail and this case has been filed only with a
motive to get the petitioner in jail. It has further been submitted
that in earlier case, the complainant has not alleged the
allegation of rape whereas in present case, she alleged the
allegation of rape and the date of occurrence in both the cases is
same. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
07.11.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted
that in this case, there is allegation of rape against the petitioner.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13236 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
is clear that the allegation of rape according to the present
complaint is of one year ago regarding which the complaint has
been made after one year. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that there is no explanation of delay.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of
the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection
with Mahila P.S. Case No. 35 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.