Patna High Court
Upendra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Upendra Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a Mahila Police Station case involving alleged sexual offences against a minor. The informant alleged that the petitioner’s son, Ankit Kumar, molested and raped her, leading to pregnancy, and that the petitioner and his family attempted to suppress the matter. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR and the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS) do not specifically implicate him, and that there is no basis for charges under the SC/ST Act. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences listed under the BNSS, POCSO Act and SC/ST Act. The court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail despite the FIR containing charges under the BNSS, POCSO Act and SC/ST Act.
- Whether the FIR and victim’s statement specifically implicate the petitioner in the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 3(5), 352, 482(2), 69, 89
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- sexual assault
- rape
- POCSO
- SC/ST Act
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57314 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur
======================================================
Upendra Mahto Son of Ram Prakash mahto Resident of Village - Madanpur
Chhapra, P.S. - Pusa, Ward no. 11, Dist. - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sarita Kumari D/o Baleshwar Ram R/o Village - Madanpur Chhapra, PS. -
Pusa, Dist. - Chhapra, DIst. - - Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Kedar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Mahila P.S. Case No. 28 of 2025 instituted for the offence
under Sections 69, 89, 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections
3(1)(r)(s)(w) & 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the
informant, a matriculation student, was repeatedly molested and
later raped by Ankit Kumar (petitioner’s son) in February 2024.
When she became pregnant, Ankit and his parents attempted to
suppress the matter and later refused to marry her, leading to a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57314 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
panchayat and the present case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged
against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case.
From perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that there is no
specific allegation against the petitioner, rather the same is
against the son of the petitioner. Victim in her statement
recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 has not stated
anything specific against the petitioner. No case is made out
against the petitioner under the offences of SC/ST Act as the
petitioner has not abused the informant in the public place.
Charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. Petitioner
bears no criminal antecedent. Other co-accused has been
granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.10.2025, passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 51116 of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner above-named,
in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court
below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57314 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahila P.S.
Case No. 28 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…