Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted as the victim’s statement did not substantiate the prosecution’s case and there were no compelling reasons to refuse bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohit Kumar, was charged under Section 96 of the B.N.S. and Section 8 of the POCSO Act for allegedly enticing a minor girl and solemnising marriage with her. The prosecution alleged the offence, while the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S. did not support the charge and she refused to undergo a medical examination. The petitioner, in custody since 14‑06‑2025, sought bail, arguing that the relationship was based on love and affection. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the alleged offences. Considering the victim’s non‑cooperation and lack of supportive evidence, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the petitioner’s cooperation with the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Section 96 B.N.S. and Section 8 POCSO Act for alleged marriage of a minor
- Whether the victim’s statement and refusal to undergo medical examination affect the bail decision
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor marriage
- Section 8 POCSO Act
- Section 96 B.N.S.
- victim statement
- medical examination refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54673 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-289 Year-2025 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
======================================================
Rohit Kumar S/o Bacchu Prasad Resident of Mohalla- Gariban Tola, P.S.-
Malsalami, Distt.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mrs. X, wife of Santosh Kumar W/o Santosh Kumar Resident of Mohalla-
Jamunapur Chai Tola, P.S.- Malsalami, Distt.- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
For the informant : Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Ram Babu Yadav, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 08-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence under Section-96 of the B.N.S. and 8 of the POCSO
Act.
3. The prosecution allegation, in short, is that the
petitioner enticed away the minor daughter of the informant and
solemnized marriage with her.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that there was love and affection between the petitioner and the
victim. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 183
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54673 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026
2/2
of the BNSS, has not supported the prosecution case. She twice
refused to appear for her medical examination. The petitioner is
under custody since 14-06-2025.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above-named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each of the satisfaction of learned
District & Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Judge
(POCSO), Patna in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No.
174 of 2025 arising out of Malsalami P.S. Case No. 289 of 2025
subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate with
the trial and make himself available as and when required by the
court.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
Checking your session…