Patna High Court
Dilip SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail is appropriate as the petitioner is only alleged to have captured the video, the investigation is complete, and there is no risk of evidence tampering.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilip Sharma, was arrested in a POCSO case for allegedly capturing a video of the rape of a 16‑year‑old girl, while the actual rape was alleged against a co‑accused who had already been granted bail. The petitioner argued that the charge against him is limited to video recording, that the investigation is complete with a charge‑sheet filed, and that he has a clean antecedent, thus posing no risk of tampering with evidence. The prosecution opposed bail, but the informant’s counsel did not appear. The court noted that no rape allegation is made against the petitioner, the investigation is concluded, and therefore there is no likelihood of evidence tampering. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under CrPC Section 437(3) and BNSS Section 480(3).
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to a person accused only of video‑recording a rape under POCSO and IPC offences.
- Whether the completion of investigation and filing of charge‑sheet eliminates the risk of tampering with evidence.
- Whether the absence of a direct rape allegation against the petitioner justifies bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 480(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 437(3)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 307, 315, 34, 354-B, 376, 384, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 4, 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- video evidence
- child sexual offence
- IPC
- CrPC
- BNSS
- investigation completed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54472 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-473 Year-2024 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Dilip Sharma, S/o Swarup Lal Sharma @ Swarup Lal Tanti, R/o Village-
Subedari Tola, Ward No.-39/44, P.S.- Saharsa Sadar, District - Saharsa
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Meena Devi, W/o Pavitar Das, R/o Vill. - Subedari Tola, Ward No.-44,P.S.-
Saharsa Sadar, District - Saharsa
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection
with POCSO Case No.26 of 2025 arising out of Saharsa Sadar
P.S. Case No.473 of 2024 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 384, 315, 376, 354-B, 307, 504,
506, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short
‘IPC’) as well as Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and is
in custody since 09.06.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54472 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
4. As per FIR, co-accused Rakesh @ Kargil Kumar
alleged to commit rape upon minor daughter of informant
aged about 16 years. It is alleged that the petitioner has
captured the video of occurrence of rape.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioner that the allegation as to commit rape upon minor
daughter of informant is available against co-accused Rakesh
Kumar, who has already granted bail by this Court through
Cr. Misc. No.3844 of 2025 dated 15.09.2025. It is submitted
that admittedly the allegation against petitioner is limited to
capture the video of occurrence of rape. While concluding
argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is
already completed, for which, charge-sheet has been
submitted and, as such, there is no chance of tampering with
the evidence. The petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
6. Learned APP opposed the prayer for grant of bail
to the petitioner.
7. On repeated calls, learned counsel appearing for
the informant has failed to join the present proceeding.
8. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54472 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
taking note of fact as the allegation of rape is not available
against this petitioner, coupled with the fact that investigation
of this case is already completed, where petitioner remains in
custody since 09.06.2025, accordingly, the petitioner, above-
named, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special
Judge, POCSO, Saharsa in connection with POCSO Case
No.26 of 2025 arising out of Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.473
of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short
‘CrPC’)/under Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…