Patna High Court

Jitendra SahniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 January 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

The Court refused bail, holding that the seriousness of the POCSO offences and the petitioner’s antecedents preclude release on bail.

Summary

Jitendra Sahni was arrested on 4 October 2025 in connection with a case alleging that he, along with co‑accused, raped a 14‑year‑old girl. The FIR charges him under Sections 70(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner contended that the allegations are false, fabricated due to a land dispute, and that he is innocent, seeking bail after being in judicial custody. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the rape charge, the victim’s support for the prosecution, and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent. The Court, after considering the facts, declined to grant bail, finding the circumstances insufficient to justify release pending trial.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate bail jurisprudence applicable to a POCSO case involving alleged rape of a minor?
Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and prior land dispute warrants bail despite serious charges and prior criminal antecedent?

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 3(5), 70(2)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 8

Subjects

bail
POCSO
rape
minor
criminal procedure
land dispute
false implication

Judgment

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1962 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-483 Year-2025 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Jitendra Sahni S/O Manezar Sahni R/O Village- Rudalpur Ward No. 11, P.S-
                 Nautan, Distt.- West Champaran.                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     X D/O Y R/O Village- Rudalpur Ward No. 11, P.S- Nautan, Distt.- West
                  Champaran.
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026                Heard Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, learned counsel for the

                petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                04.10.2025, in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 483 of 2025,

                FIR dated 04.10.2025 registered for the offence under Sections

                70(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 4 and 8 of the POCSO

                Act.

                                3. The prosecution case in brief is that the petitioner

                along with other co-accused persons committed rape upon the

                informant, who is 14 years old.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been

                implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation as

                alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1962 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                  not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R and he has been

                  made accused due to land dispute between the parties and both the

                  parties are agnates to each other. The petitioner is rotting in judicial

                  custody since 04.10.2025.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has

                  vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

                  submits that there is specific allegation of rape attributed against

                  the petitioner and the victim has supported the case of the

                  prosecution and apart from that the petitioner carries one criminal

                  antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits on the

                  basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on

                  bail in the said matter.

                                  6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

                  I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection

                  with Nautan P.S. Case No. 483 of 2025, pending in the Court of

                  Special      Judge,     POCSO-cum-D.A.S.J-VI,           West   Champaran,

                  Bettiah.

                                  7. Prayer is refused.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…