Patna High Court
Pintu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that regular bail could not be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Pintu Kumar was charged with molesting the minor daughter of a neighbour under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The petitioner sought regular bail, claiming innocence and alleging that the case was fabricated due to a land dispute. The State opposed bail, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNYS and the seriousness of the offences. The High Court examined the nature of the accusations and the victim’s statement and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed, and the trial was directed to be expedited within one year.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of molestation of a minor under the BNYS and POCSO statutes.
- Whether the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 BNYS justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences warrants continued custody of the accused.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 183, 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 8
Subjects
- regular bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- POCSO
- victim statement
- Section 183
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23915 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- BELHAR District- Banka
======================================================
Pintu Kumar Son of Ramdeo Yadav Resident of Village- Mahkara, P.S.-
Belhar, District- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o Y Resident of Village- Mahkara, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Belhar P. S. Case No. 102 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 352, 351(2), 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 8 of the Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, informant namely,
Rubi Devi alleged that on 13.04.2025, at about 5 PM, her minor
daughter was playing with ball which got bounced away in the
house of her neighbour and when daughter of informant went to
take her ball, this petitioner came from behind and forcibly
opened her pants and molested her. It is further alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23915 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
when informant went to the house of this petitioner to make
complain regarding the aforesaid incident, she was assaulted by
accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Both the
parties are next door neighbours and entire prosecution story is
an afterthought. As a matter of fact, there is land dispute
between the parties and taking advantage of the situation, this
false and concocted case has been lodged against petitioner.
Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since
06.02.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application and submitted that there is specific
accusation against petitioner that he molested minor daughter of
the informant and victim in her statement recorded under
Section 183 BNSS has supported the prosecution story. Learned
Trial Court has assessed the age of victim as 10 years.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement
of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, prayer for
regular bail of the petitioner is rejected.
7. However, since petitioner is in custody since
06.02.2026, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23915 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of
receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.