Patna High Court
Prahlad Yadav @ Prahlad Kumar @ Pralad Yadav @ Pralad KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was refused as the allegations involved a minor and were supported by a recorded victim statement.
Summary
The petitioner, Prahlad Yadav, was arrested on 3 November 2025 in connection with a rape allegation involving the minor daughter of an informant, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bihar Narcotic and Dangerous Substances Act, 2023. The prosecution presented a victim statement recorded under Section 183 of the same Act, confirming the alleged rape and noting the victim was a minor at the time. The petitioner claimed a clean record and asserted that the FIR was fabricated. The court examined the seriousness of the charge, the victim's minor status, and the corroborative statement, and concluded that granting bail would be inappropriate. Consequently, the petition for bail was denied.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case involving a minor under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNS, 2023.
- Whether the victim's statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, and the minor status of the victim preclude bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Dangerous Substances Act — s. 137(2), 96
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- Section 183 statement
- false FIR
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27159 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-545 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Prahlad Yadav @ Prahlad Kumar @ Pralad Yadav @ Pralad Kumar S/o
Nanku Yadav R/o Village - Murliganj, Ward No. 1, P.S - Murliganj, District -
Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o Y R/o Village - Murliganj, Ward No. 2, P.S - Murliganj, District -
Madhepura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
03.11.2025 in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 545 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 01.11.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner took
the daughter of the informant and committed rape upon her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27159 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/2
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the FIR.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the victim was recovered and her statement was
recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 in which she has
categorically stated that the petitioner took her to Murliganj
Maal Godam and committed rape upon her. Apart from that the
date of birth of victim is 06.12.2008 which suggest that on the
date of occurrence the victim was minor.
6. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in
the FIR supported by the victim in her statement and the fact
that the victim was minor at the time of occurrence, I am not
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with
Murliganj P.S. Case No. 545 of 2025 pending in the court of
learned District & Additional Sessions Judge VI cum Special
Judge, POCSO, Madhepura.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…