Patna High Court
Ram Chandra Yadav @ Ramchandra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Ram Chandra Yadav sought anticipatory bail after a complaint under Section 377 IPC and several provisions of the POCSO Act alleged that he had committed penetrative sexual assault on a minor. The complaint was filed on 5 January 2021, with the alleged incident dated New Year’s Day 2021, and the petitioner argued that the delay, lack of medical evidence, and a longstanding dispute between the parties indicated the complaint was false. The State and the complainant opposed bail, emphasizing the serious nature of the allegations. The court examined the records, noting the absence of any medical report, the questionable credentials of the examining doctor, and an enquiry report that found no material against the petitioner. Considering these circumstances, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.30,000 and conditions under the Bail (Special) Act, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged penetrative sexual assault under Section 377 IPC and POCSO provisions.
- Whether the absence of medical evidence and the existence of a prior dispute between the parties justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bail (Special) Act, 2023 — s. 2(1)(d), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 377
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4/18, 6/18, 7
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- sexual assault
- POCSO
- Section 377 IPC
- medical evidence
- dispute between parties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16615 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2021 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saharsa
======================================================
Ram Chandra Yadav @ Ramchandra Yadav S/o- Yoganandan Yadav R/v-
Sattar Chippa Tola W.No-6, Ps- Bihra Dist-Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X S/O Y At Sattar Chippa Tola, PS - Bihra, Dist. - Saharsa,
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandra Mohan Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant (suo
moto).
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No.01C of 2021 lodged on 05.01.2021, for
the offences punishable under Section 377 of the IPC read with
sections 7, 4/18 and 6/18 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution, the present case has been
lodged by virtue of complaint made by the father of the victim
with allegation that the petitioner had made penetrative sexual
assault with the victim.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
also submits that from the complaint itself, it becomes clear that
the date of occurrence was in the new year day of 2021 whereas
the complaint case has been lodged on 01.03.2021 i.e., after 3
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16615 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
months. He further submits that the solemn affirmation (SA) of
the complainant has taken place and upon the Court’s inquiry, it
has been accepted that no case has been filed before the
Superintendent of Police. He further submits that there was
previous enmity between the parties. He further submits that the
victim was given treatment and checked up by a doctor having
no valid degree .
5. Counsel further submits that the enquiry report has
been called for which is annexed vide Annexure-2 of the bail
petition. He further submits that from the enquiry report, it
becomes crystal clear that the dispute was going on between the
complainant and the petitioner since long and it is due to this
reason, he has been dragged in the present case.
6. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the
petitioner is not clean as there are eight criminal cases pending
against him in which he has been acquitted in four cases and in
one case, final form has been submitted and rest 3 cases, he is
on bail.
7. Learned counsel for the complainant (appeared suo
moto) vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that
in the S.A., there is specific and categorical allegation against
the petitioner. He also submits that the allegation of penetrative
sexual assault is there.
8. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16615 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
bail of the petitioner and submits that in the complaint case,
there is allegation of penetrative sexual assault against the
petitioner.
9. Upon perusal of the records, it transpires to this
Court that this case is complete absentia of any medical support.
It also transpires that there is a long pending dispute between
the parties. Report of the doctor is also lacking in the present
case. Enquiry report has been called for by the Trial Court
which indicates that there is no material against the petitioner.
10. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
this case, let the above named petitioner be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
learned Court below within a period of 4 weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand)
as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the
satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge
(POCSO), Saharsa, in connection with Complaint Case No.01C
of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the
BNSS, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.