Patna High Court

Veera Rai @ Dharmveer RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 31 January 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to bail in the present case.

Summary

The petitioner, Veera Rai, was charged in PS Case No. 157 of 2025 for multiple offences under the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, alleged to have helped two co‑villagers flee after they allegedly committed forceful carnal intercourse with a minor boy. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he was falsely implicated, that there was an unexplained delay in filing the complaint, and that he had been in judicial custody since 28‑08‑2025. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedents. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the facts and circumstances and decided to enlarge bail. The petitioner was ordered to be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Special Court under the POCSO Act.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act
Whether the alleged delay in filing the complaint and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115, 118, 126, 191, 351, 352
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6

Subjects

bail
POCSO
sexual offences
criminal procedure
Indian Penal Code
surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1602 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-157 Year-2025 Thana- Geedha District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Veera Rai @ Dharmveer Rai S/O Adit Ray R/O Village- Sonhata, P.S.- Gidha,
                 District- Bhojpur

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Gopal Govind Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Informant        :        Ms. Anju Kumari Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Nirmala Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   31-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Gidha P.S. Case No. 157 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 191, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 118(2),

                   351(2), 352 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the

                   POCSO Act.

                                3.The case of the prosecution in short is that the co-

                   villagers, namely Jitendra Rai and Subhash Rai, were

                   committing forceful carnal intercourse with a minor boy. When

                   the informant attempted to rescue the victim, both the accused

                   persons started fleeing away. It is alleged that the petitioner,

                   along with others, has helped the miscreants in fleeing away and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1602 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                            2/3




          that they have also assaulted.

                       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 submits that this case is

          in two parts: (i) where the main assailants, Jitendra Rai and

          Subhash Rai, have committed carnal intercourse with a minor

          boy and (ii) when they were fleeing away, the petitioner and

          others helped them in fleeing away. He also submits that the

          occurrence is of 01.08.2025, whereas the case has been filed on

          03.08.2025, and there is no explanation of delay. He further

          submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

          since 28.08.2025.

                       5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by

          the learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP for

          the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

          antecedent of two case.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1602 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                     Exclusive Special Court of POCSO Act-cum-District Additional

                     Sessions Judge-VI, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Gidha

                     P.S. Case No. 157 of 2025.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…