Patna High Court
Surendra DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to Surendra Das, subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties.
Summary
Surendra Das applied for bail in a POCSO case (Case No. 144 of 2024) where he was alleged to have abused an informant after a minor’s alleged kidnapping by another person, Vivek Das. The prosecution alleged offences under sections 96, 352, 351(1), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, later taken under Section 96 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4/17 and 6/17 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, faced only an abuse allegation, had no criminal antecedent, and his wife had already been granted anticipatory bail in a similar case. The State opposed bail. After hearing both sides, the court found the petitioner’s claim credible and, considering the lack of kidnapping allegation and his clean record, ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties. The order was pronounced by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a POCSO case where the only allegation is abuse of an informant and not kidnapping.
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner’s wife in a similar case influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and prolonged pre‑trial custody justify bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 3(5), 351(1), 351(2), 352, 96
- POCSO Act — s. 4/17, 6/17, 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- abuse of informant
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5302 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2024 Thana- Kurth District- Arwal
======================================================
Surendra Das S/o Late Chandrdeep Das R/o village- Gokhulpur, P.S.- Kurtha,
District- Jehanabad Arwal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX W/o YYY R/o vill - Gokhulpur, P.S.- Kurtha, Distt.- Arwal
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with POCSO Case No. 144 of 2024 arising out of Kurtha P.S.
Case No. 237 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 96, 352, 351(1), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023
and Section 8 of the POCSO Act and later on cognizance has
been taken under Section 96 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections
4/17 and 6/17 of the POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
minor daughter of the informant had gone to the fields and when
she did not return, she was being searched. The informant came
to know that one Vivek Das has kidnapped her. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5302 of 2026(4) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
alleged that when the informant went to complain, the petitioner
along with his wife abused him.
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. He also submits that the only allegation against the
petitioner is that he has abused the informant when he has gone
to complain. There is no allegation of kidnapping against the
petitioner. He further submits that the wife of the petitioner has
been granted anticipatory bail by the learned coordinate bench
of this court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6617 of 2026. The case of
this petitioner stands on similar footing. Moreover, a statement
has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no
criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody
since 12.12.2025.
5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by
the learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP for
the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5302 of 2026(4) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Exclusive Special
Judge, (POCSO Act), Jehanabad in connection with POCSO
Case No. 144 of 2024 arising out of Kurtha P.S. Case No. 237 of
2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…