Patna High Court
Ravi Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail as a prima facie case for bail exists.
Summary
Ravi Ranjan Kumar, a 22‑year‑old, was charged under multiple provisions of the BNS, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act for alleged sexual offences against the informant's daughter and for using his caste name in public. The victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS identified the place of occurrence as a "Dalan" behind the petitioner’s house, while the investigating officer recorded it as a "Gaushala" also behind the house, creating a material contradiction. The informant claimed to have witnessed the incident, but the court found his eye‑witness claim doubtful in view of the conflicting statements. The petitioner asserted innocence, clean antecedents and alleged false implication arising from a family dispute. After weighing the contradictory evidence, the court concluded that a prima facie case for bail existed and ordered the release of the petitioner on pre‑arrest bail subject to conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite allegations under the POCSO, SC/ST and BNS statutes.
- Whether the contradictions in the victim’s and informant’s statements negate the necessity of custodial detention.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- POCSO
- sexual offences
- SC/ST Act
- contradictory evidence
- Section 482
- minor victim
- caste‑based allegation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63415 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2025 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna
======================================================
Ravi Ranjan Kumar S/o Dhodho Yadav R/o Village - Patut, P.O + PS - Rani
Talab, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjay Ram Son of Late Chhathu Mochi Resident of Village- Patut, P.S.
Rani Talab, District- Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Muskan Singh, Advocate
For the informant : Mr.Pushpendra Priyadarshi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, App
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard Ms. Muskan Singh, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh,
learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with
Special POCSO Case No.179/2025 arising out Rani Talab
P.S.Case No.237 of 2025 passed in ABP No.3065 of 2025,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75,
352, 351(2), 351(3) of BNS and Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO
Act and Section 3(i)(r)(s)(w) & Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63415 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/5
allegedly committed wrong with the daughter of the informant
and has also used his caste name in the public place.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent, aged about
22 years and has not committed the offence as alleged in the
FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely
implicated in the present case due to a family dispute with the
informant and his father. The petitioner has clean antecedent and
he has never been involved in any criminal case. On these
grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Mr. Pushpendra Priyadarshi has tendered his
appearance on behalf of the informant and submitted that the
allegation made in the FIR is supported by the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, wherein she has
stated the manner in which the incident took place and the
wrong was committed with her by the petitioner, as such, the
petitioner does not deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.
6. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the
State, referring to paragraph no. 6 of the case diary, submitted
that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer
has found that the place of occurrence is the ‘Gaushala’. He
further submitted with reference to the statement of the victim
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63415 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
3/5
girl recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS that the victim has
supported the prosecution case regarding the incident. The
victim girl in her statement has stated the place of occurrence
‘Dalan’.
7.Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the allegations made in
the FIR, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183
of the BNSS, as well as, the materials that have surfaced during
the course of investigation, this Court finds that the
Investigating Officer has identified the place of occurrence as a
“Gaushala,” as recorded in paragraph no. 6 of the case diary
and in response to a specific query made by this Court regarding
the exact location of the alleged place of occurrence, it was
clarified that the said Gaushala is situated behind the house of
the petitioner and is covered by a curtain, preventing visibility
from outside but the victim girl in her statement recorded under
Section 183 of BNSS has stated the place of occurrence
‘Dalan’, as well as, there appears to be a material contradiction
with respect to the allegation of the informant, who claims to
have witnessed the incident with his open eyes. However, the
statement of the victim recorded before the learned Judicial
Magistrate indicates that the Dalan is located behind the house,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63415 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
4/5
covered by a curtain and nothing is visible from outside. In such
circumstances, the statement of the informant being the eye
witness becomes doubtful.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and further taking into account the contradiction in the
statement of the victim, informant and the petitioner, who is
aged about 22 years, this Court is of the view that the petitioner
has been able to make out a prima facie case for grant of pre-
arrest bail.
9. The learned district court is directed to release the
petitioner on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned district court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-
VII cum Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO, Patna/concerned
court, in connection with Special POCSO Case No.179/2025
arising out of Rani Talab P.S.Case No.237 of 2025, subject to
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS of 2023.
10. The learned district court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the
petitioner is involved in some other cases as what has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63415 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
5/5
stated in paragraph No.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…