Patna High Court
Gautam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The bail petition was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Gautam Kumar, was charged under Sections 64, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly raping his 13‑year‑old step‑daughter. He applied for bail, claiming innocence, stating that the informant’s recorded deposition indicated no rape and no injury to the victim. The State opposed, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS and a medical examination conducted shortly after the alleged incident. The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the relationship between the parties, and the lack of material supporting the petitioner’s claim. It rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial under the POCSO Act.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a POCSO case involving alleged rape of a minor.
- Whether the absence of physical injury and the informant’s deposition affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS suffices to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 351(2), 351(3), 64
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape
- minor
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- sexual offences
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18663 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Khagaria
======================================================
Gautam Kumar S/O Ramayan Singh Resident of Village - Amni, P.S.- Mansi,
District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX W/O XXX R/O Vill.- S.D.O Road,Vishwanathganj,Ward no- 14, P.S-
Khagaria, Dist- Khagaria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
6 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Though notice has been served upon the
informant/opposite party no. 2, there is no representation on her
behalf.
3. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with POCSO Special Case No. 89 of 2025 arising
out of Khagaria Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 registered for
the alleged offences under Sections 64, 351(2) and (3) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the POCSO
Act.
4. As per prosecution case, petitioner is the second
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18663 of 2026(6) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
husband of the informant and allegation against petitioner is that
he committed rape with 13 years old daughter of the informant
from her previous marriage.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. The prosecution story is not believable. There is no
material to support the prosecution case. The informant has
recorded her deposition and in her deposition, she stated that
some altercation and scuffle took place between her daughter
and the petitioner and in anger, she lodged this case. She also
stated that no rape was committed with her daughter and there
was no injury on her private part. Learned counsel further
submits that the petitioner is having clean antecedent and is in
custody since 09.08.2025. Charge-sheet has been submitted.
6. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the
the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP
submits that for reasons best known to her, the informant might
have resiled from her statement but the victim girl in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, fully supported
the prosecution case. Further, the occurrence took place on
01.08.2025 and her medical examination was done on
09.08.2025. Therefore, absence of injury is normal.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18663 of 2026(6) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
seriousness of allegation and also considering the nature of
allegation in the backdrop of relationship of the parties, I am not
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for
bail of the petitioner is rejected.
8. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same at the earliest considering the mandate of
the POCSO Act.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.