Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.
Summary
Chandan Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he, along with others, abducted a minor girl, assaulted her, and uploaded a video of the assault on social media, violating several provisions of the B.N.S., POCSO Act, SC/ST Act and the I.T. Act. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the investigating officer failed to seize the mobile phone or obtain a Section 65 certificate under the Indian Evidence Act, and that the victim’s statements were contradictory. He had no prior criminal record and had been in judicial custody since 26 May 2025. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. After hearing both sides, the High Court found the procedural lapses significant and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged child sexual abuse and multiple serious offences.
- Whether the failure of the investigating officer to seize the alleged video device or obtain a Section 65 certificate under the Indian Evidence Act warrants bail.
- Whether the contradictory statements of the victim affect the merit of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 126(2), 180, 183, 3(5), 351(2), 352, 74, 76
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 65
- I.T. Act — s. 67
- POCSO Act — s. 12, 8
- SC/ST Act — s. 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- child sexual abuse
- POCSO
- video pornography
- procedural lapse
- Indian Evidence Act
- SC/ST Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59471 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- ROH District- Nawada
======================================================
Chandan Kumar, S/O Kapil Manjhi, R/O Village- Godiyari, P.S.- Roh, Dist.-
Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Indu Devi, W/O Surendra Paswan, R/O Village- Godihari, P.S.- Roh, Dist.-
Nawada
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
Mr. P.K. Verma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Roh P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 76, 352, 351(2)
and 3(5) of B.N.S. read with Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act,
Section 3(i)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act and Section 67 of I.T. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner along with others caught the minor daughter of the
informant while she has gone to ease herself in evening at
07.00P.M. and took her to a dark place. When the victim
attempted to rescue herself, she was being knocked down by the
accused persons. She was being teased. It is further alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59471 of 2025(4) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
the petitioner and Rohit Kumar caught her when she tried to flee
away from the place of occurrence and torn her nighty. It is
further alleged that Vikrant Yadav started clicking video and all
the three accused persons have uploaded the video on Facebook
and Instagram on a fake I.D. in the name of Ahiran Sarkar.
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. It has further been submitted that during course of
investigation, the supervising authority has directed the I.O. to
seize the mobile and also to obtain a certificate under Section 65
of the Indian Evidence Act but the same has not been done by
the I.O. and from perusal of the entire case diary, it is clear that
it has not been verified by the I.O. as to whether actually the
video was made viral on the social media or not. During course
of investigation, the victim has given her statement under
Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. In her statement under
Section 180 of the B.N.S.S., she has stated that Chandan Kumar,
the petitioner has uploaded her video whereas in her statement
under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has stated that all the
accused persons have uploaded her video. Petitioner is having
no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59471 of 2025(4) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
since 26.05.2025.
5. Be it as may be, during course of entire
investigation the I.O. has not ascertained whether actually video
has been uploaded or not.
6. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the application for bail.
7. 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
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 and Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge
(POCSO Act), Nawada in connection with Roh P.S. Case No.
140 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…