Patna High Court
Manoj Kumar @ ManojversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Manoj Kumar, the petitioner, was arrested on 24‑01‑2025 in connection with a case involving kidnapping, kidnapping for marriage, criminal conspiracy and an alleged offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleges that on 25‑11‑2023 the petitioner abducted the informant’s daughter, purportedly for marriage, and subsequently raped her, as supported by the victim’s deposition and a medical report indicating hymen rupture. The petitioner contended he has a clean record, denies the allegations, and claimed the FIR was fabricated, noting that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS did not mention sexual assault. The court, after reviewing the trial court’s report and the seriousness of the charges, especially under the POCSO Act, declined to grant bail, directing the trial court to expedite the proceedings. Consequently, the petition for bail was refused.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of kidnapping, kidnapping for marriage, criminal conspiracy and an offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
- Whether the allegations of rape and the medical evidence warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 8
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- kidnapping for marriage
- sexual assault
- POCSO
- criminal conspiracy
- trial court report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73323 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2023 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
======================================================
Manoj Kumar @ Manoj S/O Faudar Chaudhri Resident of Village-
Faguchhapur, P.S- Tareya Sujan, District- Kushinagar, U.P.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sona Devi W/O Harendra Chaudhary R/O Village- Mangalpur, P.S- Nautan,
Distt.- West Champaran, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mayank Mohan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Prasad, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Raghvendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
24.01.2025 in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 495 of
2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366A and
34 of IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.11.2023,
at 05:00 P.M, the informant's daughter (hereinafter called as
victim), while cleaning the door then accused came on
motorcycle and by influencing her daughter took her away for
the purpose of marriage. The villagers saw that accused was
driving motorcycle, in the middle her daughter was sitting and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73323 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
on back accused was sitting. When villager asked then accused
told that taking away for solemenizing marriage when she along
with villager went to the house of accused then all accused
person admitted the occurrence and told that they will
solemenize marriage with Manoj and on protest they assaulted
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted that the statement of
the victim was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS in which
she has not stated anything about sexual assault against the
petitioner.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and
learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the informant have produced the deposition
of the victim in which she has stated that the petitioner has
repeatedly raped her in his house. Apart from aforesaid, the
medical report also suggests that the hymen was ruptured which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73323 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
suggests that she has been sexually exploited by the accused
persons. Learned counsel for the informant further submits that
the trial is going on witnesses have been examined by the
learned trial court.
6. Considering the report of the learned Trial Court, I
am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail arising out of
Nautan P.S. Case No. 495 of 2023 pending in the court of
learned Additional District & Sessions Judge- VI-cum-Special
Judge, POCSO, Bettiah, West Champaran.
7. Prayer is refused.
8. However, the learned trial court is directed to
expedite and conclude the trial.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…