Patna High Court
ROHIT KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioners, Rohit Kumar, Sulendra Mehta and Pancho Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under IPC Sections 363, 366A and POCSO Act Section 8 concerning alleged kidnapping of a minor. They contended that the informant’s allegations were false, the police investigation concluded their innocence and a final report exonerated them, and the victim did not support the prosecution. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The High Court considered whether the police exoneration and lack of victim cooperation warranted bail. It held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to conditions, to prevent undue incarceration. Accordingly, the court ordered release on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties as per Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the investigating police have exonerated the accused and the victim does not support the prosecution.
- Whether the court should proceed with cognizance of the case despite a police report indicating innocence.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- kidnapping
- POCSO
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure Code
- police exoneration
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75452 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2020 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
1. ROHIT KUMAR S/O Sulendra Mehta R/O Ramnagar Bharna, P.s.-
Nauhatta, Dist.- Saharsa.
2. SULENDRA MEHTA S/O LATE KISHUN PRASAD MEHTA R/O
Ramnagar Bharna, P.s.- Nauhatta, Dist.- Saharsa.
3. PANCHO DEVI W/O SULENDRA MEHTA R/O Ramnagar Bharna, P.s.-
Nauhatta, Dist.- Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. RAJESH KUMAR S/O SHRI RAMJI MEHTA R/O LAKSHMINIA, P.O.-
HARDI, P.S. AND DIST.- SUPAUL
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A
of the Indian Penal Code & Section 8 of POCSO Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no.2
and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no.3 is a
woman and the informant alleges that his minor daughter was
kidnapped by the accused persons including the petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75452 of 2025(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
4. The learned counsel submits that petitioners have
been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant
being related to Manohar. It is further submitted that police after
threadbare investigation came to a considered conclusion that
petitioners are innocent and thus submitted Final Form
No.135/2020 dated 05.03.2020 exonerating the petitioners of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, but the learned trial court
differing with the police report took cognizance and thus
petitioners apprehend their arrest. It is also submitted that victim
has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is further
submitted that when one investigating agency has come to a
considered conclusion after threadbare investigation that
petitioners are innocent whether it would be prudent for the
court to send the petitioners to jail based on an order of
cognizance which came to be taken based on the same police
report, which had found the petitioners innocent, more so when
victim even has not supported the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75452 of 2025(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned trial court where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Saharsa
Sadar P.S. Case No.122/2020, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.