Patna High Court

Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied because the allegations were serious, the FIR detailed the complainant’s narrative, and the petitioner had prior criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under Sections 74, 76, 78, 351, 352, 79 of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner sexually harassed and threatened a minor girl who was attending coaching classes, including threats of kidnapping and murder. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, that the sections were inapplicable, and that the age of the informant was not disclosed in the FIR. The State and the informant’s counsel opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the accusations and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the detailed FIR, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, dismissing the petition.

Issues considered

Whether the allegations against the petitioner attract the provisions of Sections 74, 76, 78, 351, 352, 79 of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 12 of the POCSO Act.
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the seriousness of the accusations and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 351, 352, 74, 76, 78, 79
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12

Subjects

anticipatory bail
sexual harassment
POCSO Act
criminal law
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45540 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1079 Year-2024 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Rajesh Kumar S/o Late Arjun Singh R/o Vill-
                 Kardhaniya, P.S.- Mahuaa, Distt- Vaishali


                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Anjali Kumari D/O Jitendra Singh R/O - Kardhaniya, P.S. - Mahua, Dist. -
                 Vaishali


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :

                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Rajeev Ranjan

                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Zainul Abedin

                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   09-04-2026      1. Heard the parties.

                    2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Mahua

                   P.S. Case No. 1079 of 2024 dated 16.10.2024 registered under

                   Section 74, 76, 78, 351, 352, 79 of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section

                   12 of the POCSO Act.

                    3. As per the prosecution case on 16.10.2024 the informant

                   gave her written statement to the S.H.O., Mahua P.S. stating

                   therein that while going to attend coaching classes the informant

                   is way laid by the petitioner and starts sexual talks with her and

                   also used to tease her due to which she has left the coaching
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45540 of 2025(6) dt.09-04-2026
                                            2/3




          class. It has further been alleged that the petitioner threatened to

          kidnap the informant if she refused to establish illicit

          relationship with her. The informant explained her nightmare to

          her mother and when the mother of the informant told the

          petitioner to refrain himself from these activities, then he used

          filthy and abusive languages against the informant’s mother and

          threatened her to kill also.

           4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has

          falsely been implicated in this case with oblique motive. The

          Sections mentioned in the F.I.R. against the petitioner are not

          attracted on the facts of the case. The age of the informant has

          not been disclosed in the F.I.R. as such Section 12 of the

          POCSO Act is also not applicable.

           5. Learned counsel for the informant and State vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail and submits that informant is being

          stalked, teased, misbehaved and talked with sexual connotation

          by the petitioner while the informant goes to attend coaching

          class.

           6. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties,

          taking into consideration the gravity of allegation against the

          petitioner, the fact that informant has narrated entire story in the

          F.I.R. lodged by her and the petitioner is having criminal
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45540 of 2025(6) dt.09-04-2026
                                                           3/3




                         antecedent also, accordingly, I am                   not inclined to grant

                         anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected.



                                                  (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…