Patna High Court
Chaina DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court denied bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Chaina Devi and Buchua Devi, were charged under Sections 87, 64, 303(2) and 3(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly trafficking a minor girl for marriage to Rajasthan. They applied for bail after being in custody since 4 May 2026. The High Court examined the seriousness of the offences and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 SCC Online 781), which emphasized stringent measures against child trafficking. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the Court declined to grant bail. It ordered the trial court to complete the trial within six months and clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application, leaving the merits for later determination.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case of alleged human trafficking of a minor under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the POCSO Act
- Whether the seriousness of the offence and the precedent set by Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 303(2), 3(4), 64, 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- human trafficking
- child marriage
- POCSO Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41337 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2026 Thana- DALMIYA NAGAR SAHAYAK District-
Rohtas
======================================================
1. Chaina Devi Wife of Manoj Sharma @ Manoj Thakur Resident of Village-
Mathuri tola, P.S.- Dalmiya Nagar, District- Rohtas.
2. Buchua Devi @ Suryamukhi Kunwar Wife of Late Vijay Thakur Resident of
Village- Pataluka, P.S.- Tilauthu, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Wife of YYY Resident of Village- Mathuri Tola Inarai, P.S.- Dalmiya
Nagar, District- Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashi Kant, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with
Dalmiya Nagar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2026 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 87, 64, 303(2) and 3(4) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners are
found to be involved in human trafficking of a minor girl to get
her married in Rajasthan.
4. The petitioners are in custody since 04.05.2026.
5. Considering the serious nature of allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41337 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/2
involving human trafficking of a minor child and also the
judgment laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Pinki Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported as 2025 SCC
OnLine 781, this Court is not inclined to grant grant bail to the
petitioners.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the
trial within six months.
8. It is, however, clarified that the observations made
herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail
application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioners at
any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express
any opinion on the merits of the case.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.