Patna High Court
RANJAN KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions of personal appearance.
Summary
Ranjan Kumar was charged under IPC sections 376, 201 read with 34 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6 for alleged rape and intimidation of Puja Kumari. The petitioner’s earlier bail plea was denied, but he renewed the application after charge framing, noting that three of eight prosecution witnesses had been examined and the victim, in cross‑examination, did not identify him, while the medical report showed no recent sexual assault. The petitioner, who has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 30‑04‑2024, offered to cooperate with the trial. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on the FIR allegations. The court, considering the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the remaining five witnesses, and the lack of conclusive evidence, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to his personal appearance at each trial date.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a rape and POCSO case after charge framing and partial examination of witnesses
- Whether the evidence on record, including the victim’s cross‑examination and medical report, justifies continued pre‑trial detention
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 34, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- POCSO
- IPC
- pre‑trial detention
- witness testimony
- medical evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58993 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2024 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Ranjan Kumar S/O Mohan Das R/O Village- Patkhauliya Bakhariya Ward No.
6, Police Sttaion- Majhauliya, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Patna
2. Puja Kumari D/O Late Chaturi Das R/O Village- Patkhauliya Bakhariya
Ward No. 6, Police Sttaion- Majhauliya, District- West Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sarvesh Kashyap, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of
bail in connection with Majhauliya P.S. Case no.296 of 2024
registered under sections 376, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC
and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner had
committed rape on the informant and had also threatened her not
to reveal it to anyone otherwise she would be killed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide
order dated 16.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48195 of 2024.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58993 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/3
It has further been submitted that petitioner has been falsely
implicated in the case on account of earlier dispute between the
parties and the reason for renewing his prayer for bail is that
now the stage of the case has changed and after framing of
charge, three out of eight prosecution witnesses have been
examined and the deposition of victim P.W.1 has been brought
on record, which indicates that she in her cross-examination, has
stated that she did not identify the person who had entered her
house and he did not commit any wrong with her and she had
filed the present case upon being tutored by the co-villagers.
Further, medical report also discloses that there is no sign of
recent sexual assault. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent
and he is in custody since 30.04.2024. He undertakes to
cooperate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant on the
basis of allegation made in the F.I.R.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering that petitioner
has remained in custody since 30.04.2024 and five prosecution
witnesses still remain to be examined and there is no likelihood
to conclude the trial in the near future, the petitioner is directed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58993 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
3/3
to be enlarged on bail in connection with Majhauliya P.S. Case
no.296 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court concerned where the case is
pending/successor Court, subject to the further condition that
petitioner shall remain physically present in the learned trial
Court on each date and shall cooperate in the trial. In case the
petitioner is absent on the two consecutive dates without
sufficient reasons, the learned trial Court would be at liberty to
cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…