Patna High Court

Vishwajeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 April 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

The bail petition was dismissed.

Summary

Vishwajeet Kumar was arrested on 20 November 2025 in connection with FIR No. 76 of 2025 alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, the POCSO Act and the I.T. Act. The prosecution alleges that he had a sexual relationship with the informant’s daughter, secretly recorded nude videos on his mobile phone and circulated them on social media. The victim’s statement was recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, argued that he has a clean antecedent and is being held merely on suspicion, seeking bail. The State, represented by Mr. Anil Kumar, opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the victim’s recorded statement. The Court, after considering the nature of the allegations and the victim’s statement, refused the bail prayer.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in view of the alleged sexual offences, victim’s recorded statement, and the seriousness of the charges under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, POCSO Act and I.T. Act.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 126(2), 180, 183, 351(2), 352, 69, 96
I.T. Act — s. 67, 67B
POCSO Act — s. 4/6

Subjects

bail
sexual offences
child protection
video pornography
victim statement
criminal procedure
Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
POCSO Act
I.T. Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22591 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- MATIYARIA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Vishwajeet Kumar S/o Vinod Mahato @ Binod Mahto Resident of Village -
                 Badharwa, P.S.-Matiyariya, Dist- West Champaran


                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus


           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Mrs. X (Imaginary Name of the Informant) W/o Mr. Y (Imaginary name of
                 the husband of the informant) R/o Village - Banahawa Parsa, Ward No. 2,
                 P.S - Matiyaria, District - West Champaran


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-04-2026                     Heard Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, learned counsel for the

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

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

                   20.11.2025 in connection with Matiyariya P.S. Case No.76 of

                   2025, FIR dated 06.08.2025 registered for the offence under

                   Sections 126(2), 69, 96, 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyay

                   Sanhita, 2023 & 67 of I.T Act however, police has found the

                   occurrence to be true under Section 126(2), 96, 137(2), 64(1),

                   351(2), 352 of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, 4/6 of POCSO

                   Act and 67B of I.T Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22591 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
                                            2/3




                          3. According to the prosecution, informant had

          fixed her daughter’s marriage to the petitioner a year ago.

          Meanwhile, the petitioner used to talk with informant’s daughter

          and allured her and made physical relation with her and secretly

          recorded videos on his mobile phone. On 31.07.2025 and

          05.08.2025, he made informant’s daughter nude video viral.

                          4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

          submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been

          made accused in this case merely on the basis of suspicion and

          the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 20.11.2025.

                          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 against the petitioner

          that he allured informant’s daughter and made physical

          relationship with her and also made her nude video and posted it

          on social media. He further submits that statement of the victim

          was recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS, in which she

          has fully supported the case of the prosecution.

                          6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case as well as nature of allegation and statement of the victim

          which was recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS, I am

          not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22591 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Matiyariya P.S. Case No.76 of 2025, pending in the Court of

                      Exclusive Special Judge, Rape & POCSO Act, Bettiah, West

                      Champaran.

                                   7. Prayer is refused.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…