Patna High Court
Vicky KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and sureties.
Summary
Vicky Kumar was arrested in connection with a case registered under multiple sections of the B.N.S. and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, alleging that he had a physical relationship with the complainant and had promised marriage. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner gave the complainant a mobile phone, met her at a hotel, and engaged in repeated physical relations, after which the complainant’s family intervened. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the allegations were false, the complainant’s statements were made under family pressure, and she denied any physical relationship, also noting her refusal to undergo a medical examination. The court considered the seriousness of the charges, the lack of conclusive evidence, and the petitioner’s custody since April 2025. After hearing both sides, the court decided to grant bail, requiring a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, pending further trial. The bail order was directed to the District and Additional Sessions Judge‑VII‑cum‑Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Court, Patna.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving offences under the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act.
- Whether the complainant’s statements, allegedly made under pressure, affect the justification for continued custody.
- Whether the lack of a medical examination report undermines the prosecution’s case for denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- sexual offences
- false accusation
- criminal procedure
- medical examination
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50566 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2025 Thana- BYPASS District- Patna
======================================================
Vicky Kumar, S/o Ramesh Prasad, Resident of Bahri Dhawalpur Panchit
Akhara Near Radhe Krishna Temple, P.S.- Bypass, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Saloni Kumari, D/o Dashai Prasad, R/o Bahri Dhawalpura, Panchit Akhara,
Near Radheshyam Temple, P.S.- Bypass, Distt- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Narain Mallik, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Bypass P.S. Case No. 217 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 69, 3(5), 352, 351(2), 351(3)
and 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 06 of POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner who is neighbour of the informant has given her a
mobile and they were on talking terms with that mobile. It is
further alleged that on 26.01.2025, the petitioner called the
informant to Moti Dhaba Hotel and there established physical
relationship on the promise of marriage. It is further alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50566 of 2025(6) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
on 18.03.2025 and 15.04.2025 also he established physical
relationship. When the family members of the informant came
to know, she was sent to her aunt’s house at Patna City. It is
further alleged that she was being abused when she pressurized
for marriage.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. During course of investigation, victim has given her
statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. wherein she has
stated that she was having affair outside marriage with the
petitioner. When the family members came to know about this
relationship, she was being threatened by her family members
and on pressure of family members, she has filed this case. She
likes the petitioner and will marry him after getting major. She
has categorically stated that the petitioner has not done anything
with her and she has filed this case in pressure. The petitioner
has not established physical relaship with her. It has further been
submitted that from perusal of the medical examination report
which is at page 22(A) of the brief it will transpire that the
informant has denied her medical examination. It has also been
submitted that the statement of the victim under Section 183 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50566 of 2025(6) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
the B.N.S.S. goes to show that this F.I.R. has been lodged under
pressure and statements made in F.I.R. are not the real facts. A
statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner
has no criminal antecedent. He is languishing in judicial custody
since 29.04.2025.
5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by
learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as
period of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand
only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions
Judge-VII-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO court, Patna
in connection with Bypass P.S. Case No. 217 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…