Patna High Court

Sakal PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 April 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

Bail was denied as the court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail given the seriousness of the offence and the electronic evidence.

Summary

The petitioner, Sakal Paswan, was arrested on 30 July 2025 in connection with FIR No. 191 of 2025 alleging that he raped a mentally unstable girl, an offence charged under Section 64/64(2)(K) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. He applied for bail, claiming innocence and that the allegations were fabricated, while the State contended that multiple witnesses and CCTV footage from a shop substantiated the rape charge. The court examined the seriousness of the allegation, the presence of electronic evidence, and the fact that the case was pending before a Special POCSO Court. Considering these factors, the court found the prosecution’s case credible and the offence grave. Consequently, the court refused the bail application, ordering the petitioner to remain in custody.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case involving a mentally unstable victim under Section 64/64(2)(K) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, in view of electronic evidence and the case’s pendency before a Special POCSO Court

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 64, 64(2)(K)

Subjects

bail
rape
mentally unstable victim
electronic evidence
Special Court
POCSO
Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25300 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Sakal Paswan Son of Late Jamuni Paswan Resident of Village - Bhusra, P.S.-
                 Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XXXX Son of YYYY A.S.I. Gaighat P.S., District - Muzaffarpur.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-04-2026                       Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned A.P.P. for

                   the State.

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

                   30.07.2025 in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 191 of

                   2025, FIR dated 29.07.2025 registered for the offence under

                   Section 64/64(2)(K) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

                                   3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he

                   committed rape with a mentally unstable girl.

                                   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.25300 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further

                      submits that the police after investigation has submitted charge-

                      sheet in this case against the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting

                      in judicial custody since 30.07.2025.

                                      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 petitioner has committed rape with a mentally

                      unstable girl and number of witnesses have supported the case

                      of the prosecution and apart from that the alleged incident was

                      captured in a CCTV camera installed in CSP shop of Manoj

                      Kumar and when the said CCTV footage was watched and it

                      was found that the petitioner committed rape upon the victim.

                                      6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

                      case as well as nature of allegation supported by electronic

                      evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in

                      connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025, pending in

                      the Court of Exclusive Special Court, POCSO-III, Muzaffarpur.

                                   7. Prayer is refused.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…