Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ranjeet SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

Bail was denied as the evidence on record justified the petitioner’s continued custody.

Summary

Petitioner Ranjeet Singh, arrested on 15 July 2025, applied for bail in connection with a case involving alleged forcible sexual intercourse with a minor, creation and viral dissemination of a video of the victim, and related offences under the B.N.S., 2023, the POCSO Act and the IT Act. The petitioner claimed a clean record and alleged that the FIR was fabricated, while the State presented call data records indicating his participation and the viral spread of the video from his phone. The learned Special Judge of the POCSO Court was still hearing the matter. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found the material on record sufficient to justify continued detention. Consequently, the court refused the bail application. The petition was dismissed without any order for release.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Sections 64(1), 77, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 67(b) of the IT Act.
  • Whether the call data records and alleged viral dissemination of the video constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • POCSO
  • child sexual abuse
  • video pornography
  • Information Technology Act
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77401 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2025 Thana- CHIHARA District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjeet Singh S/O Late Hari Singh R/O Village- Kanraidih, P.S- Chihra,
                 Distt.- Jamui.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Lilawati Devi W/O-Raju Thakur, R/O-Village- Kankarbagh. P.S. Chihura ,
                 Dist.-Jamui

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Sanju Singh, Advocate
                 For the State            :       Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   06-04-2026                      Heard Mr. Sanju Singh, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, learned APP for the State.

                                    2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   15.07.2025, in connection with Chihra P.S. Case No. 52 of

                   2025, F.I.R. dated 08.07.2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 64(1), 77, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023

                   and Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 67(b) of IT Act.

                                   3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along

                   with other co-accused person have forcibly committed physical

                   relation with the victim and its video was made and the video

                   was made viral by the petitioner on social media.

                                    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77401 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
                                                           2/2




                         the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely

                         implicated in the present case. She further submits that the

                         allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

                         petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

                                       5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on

                         the basis of material available on record and case diary,

                         vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

                         submits that it has come during investigation in paragraph-91 of

                         the case diary, the CDR of the petitioner was examined which

                         suggests that the petitioner has participated in the present crime

                         in question and from his phone the video of the victim in

                         question has been viralled by the petitioner.

                                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                         of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in

                         connection with Chihra P.S. Case No. 52 of 2025 pending in the

                         Court of learned Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO, Jamui.

                                          7. Prayer is refused.



                                                                       (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-

U          T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.