Patna High Court

Shivam KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Bail was denied as the specific accusation and the victim’s statement under Section 164 substantiate the prosecution’s case.

Summary

The petitioner, Shivam Kumar, applied for bail in a case alleging kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor under Sections 363, 366A, 504, 34 of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, abducted the minor on 4‑12‑2023 and forced sexual relations, a claim supported by the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner contended innocence, lack of prior criminal record, and that the accusation was based merely on suspicion. The court examined the specificity of the accusation and the victim’s recorded statement, finding them sufficient to justify denial of bail. Consequently, the bail plea was rejected and the trial was directed to be expedited within a year.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a kidnapping and sexual assault case under IPC and POCSO Act given the victim’s statement under Section 164.
Whether the specific and direct nature of the accusation and the victim’s statement warrant denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A, 504
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 8

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
sexual assault
POCSO
IPC
Criminal Procedure Code
victim statement
trial expediting

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75023 of 2025

                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2023 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Shivam Kumar S/o Anil Kumar Yadav R/o Village - Sirsiya Bazar, P.S - Bela,
                 District - Sitamarhi

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X W/o - XX R/o Village - Sirsiya, P.S - Bela, District - Sitamarhi

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner       :        Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   12-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 504 and 34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on

                   04.12.2023, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this

                   petitioner, kidnapped minor daughter of informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                   this case merely on suspicion. Informant is not an eye witness to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75023 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026
                                            2/3




          the occurrence and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this

          case merely on suspicion. Charge-sheet has already been

          submitted and petitioner, having no criminal antecedents, is in

          custody since 22.08.2025.

                       5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner

          and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific

          accusation that he, along with other accused persons, kidnapped

          minor daughter of informant. During course of investigation, the

          victim was recovered and in her statement, recorded under

          Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., she has supported the prosecution

          case and has categorically stated that this petitioner, along with

          co-accused Guddu Kumar, on the point of knife, kidnapped her

          and forcibly established physical relations with her.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, specific and direct nature of accusation and statement of

          the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the prayer

          for grant bail of to the petitioner is rejected.

                       7. However, considering the fact that petitioner is in

          custody since 22.08.2025, the learned trial court is directed to

          expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within a

          period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75023 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       of this order.



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…