Patna High Court
Shailesh Kumar @ Sahilesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The application to quash the FIR and the Special Court's order is dismissed as being devoid of merit.
Summary
The petitioner, Shailesh Kumar, father of the informant, filed an application seeking to quash the FIR and the order of the Special Court under the POCSO Act relating to alleged assault and attempted rape of his minor daughter. The prosecution alleged that on 8 February 2024 the petitioner forcibly entered the house, assaulted the girl, attempted sexual abuse, and fled after locals intervened. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, arising from marital discord with his wife, who allegedly lodged false complaints. The State opposed the petition, stating that the police investigation substantiated the charges and a charge‑sheet was filed under multiple IPC sections and POCSO provisions. The High Court examined the records, noted the prima facie findings of the Special Court, and held that no interference was warranted at this stage, dismissing the petition as devoid of merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Special Court and the FIR under the POCSO Act can be quashed on the ground of alleged false allegations.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of marital discord and alleged misuse of the law warrants interference with the criminal proceedings.
- Whether the prima facie evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to deny the petition for quash.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 354(b), 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 7, 8
Subjects
- POCSO
- child sexual abuse
- FIR quash
- criminal procedure
- assault
- attempted rape
- domestic violence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31177 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2024 Thana- SAHAYAK NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Shailesh Kumar @ Sahilesh Kumar S/O Shyama Charan Vidyarthi R/O Milki
Chak, P.s.- Naya Ram Nagar, Dist.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. ‘X’
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Madan Mohan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party-State: Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 The present application has been filed seeking
quashing of the order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the learned
DASJ-VIth-cum-Spl. Judge, POCSO, Katihar, in connection
with Town (Sahayak) P.S. Case No. 78 of 2024, registered under
Sections 341, 323, 354(b), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC) and Section 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) as also seeking quashing of
the First Information Report of Town (Sahayak) P.S. Case No.
78 of 2024.
2. The prosecution case, as alleged by the informant,
is to the effect that on 08.02.2024, at around 04:00 PM, father of
the informant, the petitioner herein, started knocking the door of
the house forcefully and even tried to break the doors. It has
been further alleged that the petitioner entered into the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31177 of 2025(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
after breaking the door and thereafter jumped upon the
informant, twisted the arms of the informant and snatched her
mobile phone, threw her on bed and tore her clothes. It has been
further alleged that the petitioner tried to sexually abuse the
informant and tried to rape. It has been further alleged that when
the informant raised alarm, the petitioner tried to run away, but
then he held the informant’s hair and also hit her by means of
rod. The petitioner managed to escape away after seeing the
local people.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is the father of the informant and by no stretch
of imagination he would dare to harm his daughter. Further, the
marriage between the petitioner and one Asha Roy, the parents
of the victim girl, was solemnized on 02.02.2006 as per the
Hindu rites and rituals. Thereafter, the petitioner and his family
members had to face cruel behaviour at the hands of said Asha
Roy, wife of the petitioner. The wife of the petitioner also used
to be in touch with unknown persons and used to talk to them
over phone and whenever the petitioner objected, the said Asha
Roy got angry. It has been submitted that when this petitioner
objected to the bad and cruel behaviour of his wife, then, in
turn, she lodged FIR bearing Khagaul P.S. Case No. 21 of 2013,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31177 of 2025(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
whereafter the petitioner was arrested and was remanded into
judicial custody. Learned counsel for the petitioner also
submitted that the allegation is false and frivolous.
4. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed
the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that the police after
thorough investigation found the allegation true against the
petitioner and accordingly charge-sheet was submitted against
the petitioner under Sections 341, 323, 354(b), 504 and 506 of
the IPC as well as under Section 7 and 8 of POCSO Act,
whereupon the learned Special Court took cognizance against
the petitioner and the same has been challenged before this
Court by way of the present application.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State and perused the records.
6. The learned court below after submission of the
charge-sheet against the petitioner has prima facie found the
case true against the petitioner. The matter relates to POCSO
Act, wherein the victim happens to be a minor girl. The
allegation to the extent of attempt of rape coupled with the fact
that the clothes of the victim were torn in the process and she
could be saved only when local persons intervene.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances, the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31177 of 2025(2) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
being under POCSO Act and the learned Special Court has
prima facie found the case true against the petitioner, no
interference, at this stage, is required.
8. The present application is devoid of merit and is
accordingly dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.