Patna High Court
Santosh MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Mandal, was charged under multiple sections of the BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly abducting and sexually assaulting the informant's minor daughters aged four and five. He applied for bail, arguing that the FIR was filed after an inordinate delay, the alleged crime occurred in a public place without eyewitnesses, and he has no prior criminal record. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the heinous nature of the offence, the victims' statements recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, and the lack of prosecution witness examination. The court noted that after charge‑framing, no prosecution witnesses had been examined and bailable warrants had been issued, but the seriousness of the allegations and victim statements outweighed the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to take coercive measures to ensure witness attendance without unnecessary adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged sexual assault of minor girls under the BNS, 2023 and POCSO Act.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and lack of eyewitnesses justify bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- POCSO Act
- criminal procedure
- witness attendance
- serious offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69291 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria
======================================================
Santosh Mandal S/o Kishori Mandal Resident of village- Khamkol, Ward No.
01, PS- Forbesganj, Distt.- Araria, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX S/o XXX resident of XXXX
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kumar Ravish, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ajay Kr. Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Binod Kr. Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Mahila P.S. Case no.06 of 2025
registered under sections 65(2), 352, 351(3), 351(2) and 3(5) of
BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner took way
the informant’s minor daughters and subjected them to sexual
assault.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, at the
outset, that the present F.I.R has been filed after an inordinate
delay of five days, for which no explanation has been tendered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69291 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
It has further been submitted that the alleged occurrence is
highly improbable as the place of occurrence which has been
shown is a public place and yet there is no eye-witness to the
occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2025 with
no criminal antecedent and after framing of charge on
09.09.2025, no witness has been examined on behalf of
prosecution.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant on
the ground that victims are minor girls of 4 and 5 years of age
who have been subjected to heinous crime of sexual assault and
the same stands supported by the victims in their statements
recorded under Section 183 of BNSS.
6. A report had been called for with respect to the
stage of the trial and the said report has received which indicates
that after charges being framed on 09.09.2025, no prosecution
witnesses have been examined and thereafter on 09.02.2026
bailable warrants have also been issued for their production.
7. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering the serious
nature of allegation against the petitioner and statements of the
victim under Section 183 of BNSS, I am not inclined to grant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69291 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
bail to the petitioner and the application is rejected.
8. However, learned trial Court is directed to take
further coercive measures in order to procure the attendance of
the witnesses for moving ahead with the trial without giving any
unnecessary adjournments.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…