Patna High Court
Lal Babu Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions of appearance and trial expeditiousness.
Summary
The petitioner, Lal Babu Mahto, was charged under IPC Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) and POCSO Act Sections 4 and 6 for allegedly raping a woman in her house. After being in custody since August 2024, his earlier bail plea was rejected, but he was permitted to renew the application. The court noted that only one of seven charge‑sheet witnesses had been examined and the medical report did not find spermatozoa, weakening the prosecution's case. Considering the prolonged detention and the lack of substantive progress in the trial, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of physical presence in court and expeditious trial. The bail order also directed the trial court to avoid unnecessary adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite charges being framed and trial having commenced
- Whether the paucity of examined witnesses and the medical report lacking spermatozoa justify bail
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention warrants relief
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- POCSO
- criminal intimidation
- pre‑trial detention
- medical evidence
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76355 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Lal Babu Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar S/O Late Ramphal
Mahto R/O Vill.- Ladaura(Ladhauda), P.O- Ladaura Pakri, P.S- Turki (O.P)
Kudhani, Dist.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. X N/A N/A
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Smiti Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shishir Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The present application has been filed for renewing
his prayer for bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 31
of 2024 for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 of Indian
Penal Code and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
3. The allegation in the F.I.R is that the petitioner had
entered the house of the informant and committed rape with her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that earlier the prayer of the petitioner has been rejected vide
order dated 29.05.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 9292 of 2025 with
liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76355 of 2025(5) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
of charge. Charges have been framed against the petitioner in
the learned Court concerned on 20.08.2025 and out of seven
charge-sheet witnesses, only one witness has been examined till
date and is not likely to conclude in the near future. It is further
submitted that the informant/victim has been medically
examined during course of investigation and the medical report
does not support the allegations as no spermatozoa has been
found in the vaginal swab of the informant/victim. The
petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2024 and undertakes to co-
operate in the case/trial.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2,
however, strongly opposed grant of bail on the ground that trial
has commenced and as such petitioner dos not deserve to be
granted the privilege of bail.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts of the
case and considering that charges have been framed in the
matter and out of seven charge-sheet witnesses only one witness
has been examined, and is not likely to conclude in the near
future as also the petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2024, the
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with
Mahila P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76355 of 2025(5) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor Court on the following
conditions:-
(1) The petitioners shall remain physically present in
the learned trial Court on each date and shall cooperate in the
trial. In case the petitioner is absent on the two consecutive
dates without sufficient reasons, the learned trial Court would be
at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(2) The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the
trial and conclude the same at the earliest without giving
unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…