Patna High Court
Ram Sanjivan Sahni @ Ram Sajiwan SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and conditions, finding no sufficient ground to deny bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Sanjivan Sahni, was charged under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act for allegedly enticing a 17‑year‑old girl into a sexual relationship by promising marriage. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner used a marriage allurement to establish a sexual relationship, while the petitioner claimed the relationship was consensual and that the case was false. The victim’s statement, recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, asserted that the petitioner forced the relationship. The court considered the nature of the allegation, the minor’s age, the petitioner’s custody period, and the filing of a charge‑sheet. After evaluating the submissions, the court granted bail to the petitioner with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and additional safeguards.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 64(1) of the BNSS and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act in view of the alleged sexual relationship with a minor
- Whether the alleged consensual nature of the relationship and the minor’s age justify bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 183, 480(3), 64(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- sexual assault
- consent
- BNSS
- Section 64
- Section 4 POCSO
- Section 8 POCSO
- age of consent
- marriage promise
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73878 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- HATHAURI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Ram Sanjivan Sahni @ Ram Sajiwan Sahani S/O Chulahi Sahni R/O Village-
Dakrama, P.S- Hathauri, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX D/O YYY R/O Village- Dakrama, P.S- Hathauri, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh, Advocate
Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Samrat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Hathauri P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 registered for
the alleged offences under Section 64(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
03. As per prosecution case, giving allurement of
marriage, the petitioner enticed the minor informant to establish
sexual relationship with her. Thereafter, he took her away to he
house of his sister from where the minor informant was brought
back by the villagers.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73878 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
From the contents of the FIR, it is apparent that it was a case of
consensual relationship. The minor informant was in love with
the petitioner and despite having knowledge about petitioner
already being married, she wanted to marry with the petitioner.
The informant has refused to undergo medical examination and
in the first information report, she disclosed her age to be 17
years. School leaving certificate was obtained on 23.06.2025
after lodging of the FIR and no reliance could be placed from
such certificate for assessing the age of the victim. Learned
counsel further submits that even during investigation, the
witnesses stated that the petitioner and the informant were in love
and they were ready to marry. Learned counsel further submits
that when the marriage could not be solemnized, this false case
has been lodged. The petitioner is in custody since 22.06.2025
and charge-sheet has been submitted. The petitioner is having
antecedent of one case under Section 498A of IPC.
05. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently oppose
the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel
for the informant submits that the statement of the victim girl
was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS wherein she has stated
that the petitioner forcibly established sexual relationship with
the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73878 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
nature of allegation and the age of the informant at which a girl
develops sufficient maturity and also considering the period of
custody of the petitioner along with submission of charge-sheet,
the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Exclusive Special Court, POCSO Act-III, Muzaffarpur/court
concerned in connection with Hathauri P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025,
subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of BNSS
and the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…