Patna High Court
Sachin KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Sachin Kumar applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving alleged kidnapping, rape of a minor, and criminal intimidation under IPC sections 366A, 376D, 506 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6. The informant, Arti Devi, alleged that her minor daughter was abducted by the petitioner and three others, taken to a forest, repeatedly raped, and later abandoned at a railway station. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the informant and accused are relatives and the complaint stems from a personal dispute. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations. After considering the submissions and the material on record, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail and rejected the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the alleged offences under IPC and the POCSO Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 366A, 376D, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC
- POCSO
- kidnapping
- rape of minor
- criminal intimidation
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17306 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Jamui
======================================================
Sachin Kumar S/O Tripurari Singh Resident Of Vill.- Jamui Khairiya, P.s.-
Jhajha, Distt.- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Smt. X W/O Y R/O Nimarang, Ward no. 29, P.O. and P.S. and Dist.- Jamui,
811307
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anisha Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Jamui Mahila P.S. Case No. 27 of 2024,
registered for the offence under Sections 366A, 376D, 506 of
the Indian Penal Code and section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act
lodged on 05.05.2024 by the informant, Arti Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that her daughter went out to purchase some household
materials but failed to return. Later, received phone call from
RPF, Patna Junction informing that she is under the protection
of the said RPF. The victim girl narrated that in an auto, four
persons including this petitioner took her away, went to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17306 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/2
forest in a one room thrashed her and further allegation is that
minor daughter was repeatedly raped by all of them. She was
later left at the Jamui Railway Station whereafter she took the
RPF. This led to the FIR u/s 366(A), 376(D)/506 of the IPC and
u/s 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
informant and the accused persons are close relatives and there
was an affair with the elder sister which was unacceptable to the
informant.
5. Learned APP, on the other hand submits that from
the FIR, it is clear that the minor girl has alleged that the
petitioner has raped her along with her associates.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission of the parties
and also the material available on record and the allegation
which has been made against the petitioner, this Court is not
inclined to extend him privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…