Patna High Court
Pappu Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties with conditions of appearance.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Kumar Mahto, was charged under Section 65(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a six‑year‑old girl, the victim's daughter. He applied for bail, claiming the accusation stemmed from personal enmity, that he was engaged in agricultural work at the time, and that medical examination showed no signs of sexual assault. During trial, the prosecution’s key witnesses, including the informant and the victim, turned hostile and did not support the case. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the victim’s initial supportive statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. The High Court, noting the lack of corroborative evidence, the hostile witnesses, the petitioner’s clean record and prolonged pre‑trial custody since 12‑12‑2024, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and conditions of regular appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of rape of a minor under the POCSO Act and Section 65(2) of the B.N.S. given the seriousness of the offence
- Whether the absence of medical evidence and the hostile stance of prosecution witnesses justify bail
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and prolonged pre‑trial detention warrant bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- rape of minor
- Section 65(2) B.N.S.
- hostile witnesses
- medical evidence
- criminal antecedent
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69639 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-740 Year-2024 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Pappu Kumar Mahto S/o Ramyad Mahto Resident of village- Dudha Mathiya,
Ward no-2, P.s.- Majhauliya, District- West Chamapran, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anisha Sharma W/o Sandip Sharma R/o vill - Dudha Mathiya, ward no. 2,
P.s.- Majhauliya, Distt.- West Champaran, Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mayank Mohan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Section 65(2) of the B.N.S. and
Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
3. Petitioner is said to have committed rape with the
minor daughter of the victim.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner has been made an accused in the present case
on account of some enmity and he was only engaged in some
agricultural work on the date of occurrence. It has further been
submitted that the medical examination also does not show any
sign of sexual assault and during the trial also both prosecution
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69639 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
witnesses, the informant and the victim have not supported the
case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile. Further,
the petitioner is in custody since 12.12.2024 with no criminal
antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for bail on the ground that the victim is a six year
old girl and she had originally supported the case of the
prosecution in her statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S.
6. A report had been called for with regard to the stage
of the case and the same indicates that four out of six
prosecution witnesses have been examined but yet the court has
sought for another six months time for concluding the trial.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the fact that neither the
informant nor the victim has supported the prosecution case
during trial and the petitioner has already remained in custody
since 12.12.2024 with no criminal antecedent, let the above
named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Majhuliya P.S. Case No. 740 of 2024, subject to the conditions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69639 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
that:
(I) One of the bailors will be mother of the
petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every
date till conclusion of trial and if the petitioner does not appear
without any substantial and satisfactory reason, the learned
court below would be at liberty to cancel his bail bonds.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…