Patna High Court
Gautam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied because the seriousness of the alleged rape of a minor and the supporting evidence outweighed the petitioner’s claim of innocence.
Summary
The petitioner, Gautam Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case alleging rape of a minor under Section 70(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. He applied for bail, claiming innocence and that the charges were based merely on suspicion, and noted a prior criminal antecedent for which he was on bail. The State opposed bail, citing corroborative witness statements and the victim’s recorded statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court examined the seriousness of the alleged offence, the evidence presented, and the statutory provisions governing bail in such grave crimes. Concluding that the nature and gravity of the accusation warranted continued custody, the Court denied the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a rape case involving a minor under Section 70(2) B.N.S. 2023 and Section 4 POCSO Act
- Whether the presence of corroborative witness statements and victim’s statements under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 precludes bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 70(2)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- criminal procedure
- serious offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62675 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2025 Thana- SHAMBHUGANJ District- Banka
======================================================
Gautam Kumar S/o- Vidya Prasad Singh Resident of Parhariya (Pararia) P.S-
Shambhuganj, Dist- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. “X”, Village- Parhariya (Pararia) Ps- Shambhuganj Dist- Banka
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and perused the case diary. Despite valid
service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Shambhuganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2025, instituted for the
offences punishable under Sections 70(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner
along with other co-accused persons has committed rape upon
the victim/informant who is a minor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62675 of 2025(4) dt.02-02-2026
2/2
Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the
petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of
suspicion. It is further submitted that the allegation levelled
against the petitioner is false and concocted. The petitioner is in
custody since 13.04.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent in
which he is on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that
witnesses have also supported the case of prosecution in
paragraph nos. 8, 16 and 17 of the case diary. It is further
submitted that the victim has levelled specific allegation against
the petitioner in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and
183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Hence,
the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…