Patna High Court
Parmeshwar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The application for regular bail was dismissed; the petitioner was not granted bail.
Summary
Petitioner Parmeshwar Sah was arrested in connection with a case registered on 28‑09‑2025 alleging the rape of a nine‑year‑old girl under Section 65 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. He applied for regular bail, arguing that the FIR was lodged five days after the incident, lacked the informant’s signature, and was filed amid a Panchayat election, and that medical evidence did not support the rape allegation. The State and the second opposite party opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence against a minor and noting that charges had been framed and a witness examined. The court examined the submissions and the record and concluded that the gravity of the alleged offences and the presence of a minor victim outweighed the procedural deficiencies raised. Consequently, the court dismissed the bail application.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of granting bail to an accused of rape of a minor under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
- Whether delay in filing the FIR, lack of informant’s signature, and the election backdrop justify bail.
- Whether the absence of corroborative medical evidence negates the seriousness of the charge for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. Act — s. 65
- POCSO Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape of minor
- FIR delay
- medical evidence
- election backdrop
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14223 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-652 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Parmeshwar Sah S/o- Late Pachkauri Sah @ Pachikauri Sah R/v- Bhasar
Machhaha Ps- Sitamarhi Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Meena Devi w/o- Late Rambali Sah R/v- Bhasar Machhaha, Sahu Tola,
W.No-11, Ps- Sitamarhi Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhubala Verma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murlidhar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No.
652 of 2025 dated 28.09.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 65 of B.N.S. and Section 4/6 of
POCSO Act.
3. As per the allegation, this petitioner is alleged to
have committed rape upon the victim girl, who is stated to be
nine years old.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14223 of 2026(3) dt.20-04-2026
2/2
that there is a delay of five days in lodging of the FIR. There is
no signature of the informant on the formal FIR and the
allegation is in the backdrop of Panchayat Election. It has
further been submitted that the medical evidence does not
support the allegation of rape. The petitioner is in custody since
29.09.2025 having one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the Opposite Party No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and has submitted that the victim is
aged only nine years old and the allegation is with respect to
Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the
Opposite Party No.2 has further submitted that charges in this
case have been framed and one witness has been examined
during the trial.
6. Perused the records and considered the submission
of the parties, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and is accordingly dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…