Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Radhe Shyam SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Petitioner Radhe Shyam Singh was arrested in a case alleging rape under Section 376(D)(A) of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. He contended that in three earlier cases against him, police investigations concluded with final reports exonerating him, and that the present case was similarly false, being filed by an informant at his brother's behest. The police investigation in the present case also submitted a final report clearing the petitioner, but the trial court nonetheless took cognizance of the FIR. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the police report negated any ground for his arrest. The State and the informant opposed the bail but could not rebut the claim of police exoneration. The High Court, considering the lack of corroborative medical evidence and the police’s concluding report, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the investigating police have submitted a final report exonerating the accused.
  • Whether a court can take cognizance of an FIR despite a police exoneration report.
  • Applicability of Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in granting anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • rape
  • POCSO
  • police exoneration report
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 BNS Act
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72097 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- ANDHRAMATH District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Radhe Shyam Singh S/O Late Juthai Singh R/O Village- Mirzapur, P.S -Parsa,
                 District - Saran At Chapra.
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     XXXX D/O Ram Sewak Ram R/O Village- Nebua, P.S- Anathra Math,
                  Distt.- Madhubani.
                                                           ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Parmod Ban Bihari Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Chandrabhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   21-04-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P.

                   for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   informant.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Section 376 (D) (A) of the Indian

                   Penal Code and Section 4, 6 of POCSO Act.

                                3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   submits that petitioner had antecedent of three cases but then in all

                   the cases, police after after investigation submitted final form

                   exonerating the petitioner of the allegation, it is next submitted that

                   all the three cases were instituted by different informant at the

                   behest of his brother, it is next submitted that instant case also has

                   been instituted by the informant at the behest of his brother with an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72097 of 2025(3) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/3




          allegation that accused person including the petitioner entered her

          house on 29.02.2024 at 1 a.m. and raped her in turn, further

          petitioner is an L.I.C. Agent, it is next submitted that petitioner has

          been falsely implicated in the instant case, it is next submitted that

          it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to why the petitioner

          would have gone to the house of the informant for committing

          occurrence of rape when he is known to her, it is next submitted

          that the medical report also does not corroborate rape, it is further

          submitted that police after threadbare investigation came to a

          considered conclusion that the petitioner is innocent and thus

          submitted final form exonerating the petitioner of the allegation as

          alleged in the F.I.R. but then the learned trial Court in a mechanical

          manner took cognizance differing with the police report.          It is

          further submitted that when one investigating agency after

          threadbare investigation came to a considered conclusion that the

          petitioner is innocent whether it would be prudent for the Court to

          send the petitioner to jail based an order of cognizance which came

          to be taken based on the same police report which exonerated the

          petitioner of the allegation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then is not in a position to

          rebut the said submission of learned counsel appearing on behalf of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72097 of 2025(3) dt.21-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      the petitioner.        Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                      informant also opposes the anticipatory bail application of the

                      petitioner but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the

                      learned counsel for the petitioner that in all the 3 cases instituted

                      against the petitioner, final form was submitted and in the instant

                      case, police after investigation submitted final form exonerating the

                      petitioner of the allegation.

                                    5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

                      the case, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner.

                                    6. Let the petitioner, as named above, in the event of his

                      arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be enlarged on

                      bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five Thousand)

                      with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                      learned Additional Sessions Judge 7 cum-Spcial Judge, POCSO,

                      Madhubani, in connection with Andhraghat P.S. Case No. 46 of

                      2024, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of

                      the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya

                      Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.




                                                                           (Satyavrat Verma, J)
sanjeev/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.