Patna High Court
Shashi Nath MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Shashi Nath Mandal sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging sexual offences under sections 65(1), 351(2), 351(3), 61(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and section 6 of the POCSO Act. The informant claimed illicit relations between the petitioner and his wife and daughter, leading to the daughter's pregnancy. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the case was fabricated to recover land sold to him by the victim’s mother, highlighted the petitioner’s clean record, and pointed out that a DNA test request had been refused. The court noted the refusal of DNA testing and the petitioner’s clean antecedents as material factors and allowed the anticipatory bail application. The bail was granted subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and the condition that the DNA test issue be verified by the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations under the BNSS 2023 and POCSO Act.
- Whether the refusal to conduct a DNA test and the claim of a false case warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 351(2), 351(3), 482(2), 61(2), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 6
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false case
- DNA test
- POCSO
- land dispute
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50815 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2025 Thana- PALASI District- Araria
======================================================
Shashi Nath Mandal S/o Late Dhelayi Mandal R/o vill - Korhailli, P.S.-
Palasi, Distt.- Araria
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajesh Kumar Sah S/o- Shankhu Sah Resident of village- Kodhaili, ward
no.-05 PS-Palasi District-Araria
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.N. Shai, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur
For the State : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Suraj Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 19-02-2026 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,
learned APP for the State, and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Palasi P.S. Case No.41 of 2025 for the offence
under sections 65(1), 351(2), 351(3), 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023,
and under section 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. The informant alleges that his wife had illicit
relations and further in connivance with the wife of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50815 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
2/4
informant, the daughter was also roped into establishing illicit
relations and subsequently the daughter conceived. The
informant further alleges that the petitioner and other accused
persons had also established illicit relations with his wife and
daughter. On the basis of the aforesaid statement of the
informant the FIR being Palasi P.S. Case No. 41 of 2025 was
registered against the accused persons including the petitioner.
4. Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner has submitted that though the allegation against
the petitioner is of having established sexual relationship with
the victim girl, but the petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case. Adverting to Annexure P/2 which is sale deed, it is
the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
that the co-accused mother of the victim girl being the guardian
of the her children, had sold the land to the petitioner and
thereafter the informant, i.e., the husband of the vendor, has
filed this instant false case in order to recover the property. He
has further submitted that the petitioner has filed an application
for a DNA test of the victim girl, but it is the family of the
victim girl who has refused to get the DNA test done. It is also
the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the mother of
the victim girl had confessed before the Police which supports
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50815 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
3/4
the case of the petitioner. He further submitted that the
petitioner, being a government school teacher having clean
antecedent had been roped in this false and fabricated case by
the informant to grab back the land under the sale deed executed
by his wife who is pertinently the co-accused in the present case
and also the mother of the victim girl. Lastly, the learned Senior
Counsel has submitted that the CDR of the mobile belonging to
the petitioner would show that the petitioner has not even visited
the house of the informant.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and the fact
that the petitioner had moved an application to get the DNA test
done, which was refused by the informant, as also the clean
antecedents of the petitioner, this application is allowed.
6. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above-named,
in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks from today
in the Court below, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned D.A.J. - VI – cum – Special Judge (POCSO),
Araria/concerned Court below in connection with Palasi P.S.
Case No.41 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50815 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
4/4
7. It is made clear that the bail bonds of the
petitioner shall only be accepted, if the contention of the
petitioner, regarding moving an application before the Police /
Investigating Agency, for DNA test of the victim girl, is found to
be true by the trial Court / concerned Court.
8. Needless to state that this Court has not
expressed any opinions on the merits of the case.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…