Patna High Court
Amit Singh @ Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Singh, was arrested in connection with a POCSO case alleging rape of the informant's minor daughter, charged under IPC sections 376D, 354C, 506, 34 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he was falsely implicated due to a prior dispute, highlighted the absence of a medical examination of the victim, and asserted his clean criminal record. The State opposed bail, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., which corroborated the FIR. The Court examined the seriousness of the offences, the victim’s statement, and the lack of any mitigating factor. Consequently, the Court refused to grant bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a POCSO case involving alleged rape of a minor, considering the victim’s statement and seriousness of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 354C, 376D, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape of minor
- IPC
- Criminal Procedure Code
- victim statement
- medical examination
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73698 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Amit Singh @ Amit Kumar S/o Late Devkumar Singh R/o Mohalla- Sainik
Nagar, Aurangabad, P.S.- Town P.S. Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad
(Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX R/o Mohalla- Sainik Nagar, Aurangabad, P.S.- Town P.S. Aurangabad,
District- Aurangabad (Bihar)
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with POCSO
G.R. No. 109 of 2024, arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 44 of
2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 376D, 354C,
506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6 of the
POCSO Act.
3. Allegation against the accused persons including the
petitioner is of commission of rape upon the informant’s minor
daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73698 of 2025(4) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
present case. Learned counsel further submitted that the
petitioner is being dragged in this case merely due to previous
dispute between the parties. He further contended that no
medical examination of the victim was conducted to ascertain
the factum of the occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of
the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 06.05.2025
and has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further
submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section
164 of the Cr.P.C. has corroborated the contents of the FIR, and
therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as also Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this
stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…