Patna High Court
Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that pre‑arrest bail must be denied where the offences are grave, involving kidnapping and gang‑rape of a minor, and the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC supports the prosecution.
Summary
The petitioner, Chhotu Kumar, filed a pre‑arrest bail application in a case alleging kidnapping and gang‑rape of a minor under Sections 376D/34 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, together with co‑accused, abducted the victim, took her to a forest and raped her, and the victim’s statement under Section 164 of the CrPC corroborated the charge. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the gravity of the allegations, and the victim’s recorded statement. Considering the nature of the crime and the risk of tampering with evidence, the court found no sufficient ground to grant bail before arrest. Consequently, the petition for pre‑arrest bail was rejected, and the petitioner remains liable for arrest.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate standard for granting pre‑arrest bail in cases involving kidnapping and gang‑rape of a minor under the IPC and POCSO Act?
- Does the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC create a sufficient ground to deny pre‑arrest bail?
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 376D
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- sexual offences
- kidnapping
- gang‑rape
- IPC
- POCSO
- CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27054 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-377 Year-2023 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu Yadav Son of Sanjiv Kumar @ Sanjeev Yadav
Resident of Village- Rajni, ward no. 06, Post- Rajni, P.S.- Murliganj, District-
Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Wife of YYY Resident of Rajni, Ward No. 06, P.S.- Murliganj, Distt.-
Madhepura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 376D/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner, along
with other co-accused persons, kidnapped the daughter of
informant, took her into the forest, and gang-raped her. The
victim, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has
supported the prosecution case and stated that this petitioner and
co-accused Sundar raped her.
4. Considering the nature of accusation, gravity of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27054 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026
2/2
offence and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164
Cr.P.C., prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.