Patna High Court
Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, with conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Summary
Ankit Kumar was arrested on 2 August 2025 in connection with a kidnapping and alleged sexual offences involving a minor, under Sections 137(2), 96, 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that an unknown person abducted the minor for marriage or illicit intercourse, while the petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, had a clean antecedent, and that the victim’s statement under Section 183 did not support the case and she refused medical examination. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR was fabricated and sought bail; the Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. The court, after considering the circumstances, ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent but stipulated that this verification should not delay the acceptance of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and POCSO Act given the seriousness of the alleged crimes.
- Whether the victim’s statement and refusal of medical examination affect the merit of the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and clean antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(3), 183, 96
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- kidnapping
- minor
- false implication
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- victim statement
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2965 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar Mahto S/o Raj Kumar Mahto R/o Village -
Loknathpur Ganj (Dalasingsarai), P.S - Dalasingsarai, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sunita Devi W/o Mukesh Kumar Patel R/o Village - Agarer Kala, P.S -
Suryapura, District - Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 Despite valid service of notice upon Opposite Party
no.2, no one appeared on behalf of Opposite Party no.2.
2. Heard Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
02.08.2025 in connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No. 246 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 22.07.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2), 96, 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023
and 4/6 of POCSO Act.
4. According to prosecution case, an unknown person
kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant for the purpose
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2965 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
of marriage or illicit intercourse.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the
F.I.R. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section
183 BNSS in which she did not support the case of the
prosecution and apart from that the victim has also refused for
her medical examination. He further submits that the police after
investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner
and the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VIIth-cum-Special Court (POCSO), Rohtas in
connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No. 246 of 2025, subject to
the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2965 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…