Patna High Court
Deepak Sharma @ Deepak Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted and dismissed the application.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered a second bail application filed by Deepak Sharma, who is charged with gang rape under Sections 341, 323, 376(D), 506 and 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner participated in the rape of the complainant, who is also the informant. The petitioner contended that he is innocent and that the trial has already commenced with most witnesses examined. The Court observed that the trial was underway, no fresh material or new ground for bail was presented, and the gravity of the offences under the POCSO Act warranted continued custody. Accordingly, the Court refused bail, dismissed the application and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in a POCSO case when the trial is already in progress and no fresh ground is shown
- Whether the seriousness of offences under Sections 376(D), 376AB of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act precludes bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 376AB, 376(D), 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape
- IPC
- criminal procedure
- trial expedite
- accused rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.406 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria
======================================================
Deepak Sharma @ Deepak Kumar Sharma Son of Umesh Sharma Resident of
Village -Basaithi, Baseti, Ward No. 03, PS -Bausi, District -Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XX Daughter of YY Resident of village- Harpur, Ward no. 5, Ps- Bausi,
Dist- Araria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Spl. (POCSO)
Case No. 38 of 2024 arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 12 of
2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341,
323, 376(D), 506, 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and Section
6 of the POCSO Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected vide order dated 20.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.406 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
No. 60084 of 2024, which reads as under:
“Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Spl (POCSO) Case No. 38 of
2024 arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 12 of
2024 registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 376(D), 506, 376AB of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO
Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the
allegation against the petitioner alongwith other
accused persons is of committing the rape.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence.
5. Learned APP appearing for the
State and learned counsel for the informant
opposed the prayer for regular bail of the
petitioner.
6. The informant is the victim herself.
She has said in the FIR that gang rape was
committed by the accused persons including the
petitioner. The petitioner is in jail since
14.03.2024.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and submissions of
learned counsel for the parties, I am not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and
therefore, the present bail application is hereby
rejected.
8. The trial is directed to be expedited.
9. Learned counsel for the informant,
Sri Vivekanand Singh undertakes to co-operate
in the trial.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
trial has started and most of the witnesses have been examined.
5. Considering the fact that the trial has started and no
fresh ground for grant of bail is made out, I am not inclined to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.406 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
review my earlier order.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…