Patna High Court
Sushil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 64(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that on 4 August 2024 the petitioner, with two friends, threatened an informant to withdraw a previously filed case and subsequently raped her. The petitioner pleaded innocence, claiming false implication, while the State highlighted the specific accusations and the petitioner's prior criminal record. The court examined the gravity of the alleged offences, the direct nature of the accusations, and the petitioner’s antecedent. Considering these factors, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the specific accusations of rape and threat, the seriousness of the offences under the B.N.S., and the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 3(5), 64(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- criminal antecedent
- specific accusation
- bail jurisprudence
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61809 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2024 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Sushil Kumar S/O Naresh Mahato Resident of Village - Supaina, P.S. -
Bathnaha, District - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Dinesh Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 08-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1) and
3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that on
04.08.2024 at about 10:25 AM, while she was working in the
field, in the meantime, this petitioner, along with his two
friends, came there and started threatening the informant to
withdraw the case earlier filed by her and later on, committed
rape upon her.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61809 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026
2/2
this case with ulterior motive.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
with specific accusation that he threatened the informant to
withdraw the case earlier lodged by her and committed rape
upon her. Petitioner has got one criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence
and criminal antecedent of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…