Patna High Court
Ravi JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that regular bail could not be granted as the trial was nearing conclusion and the petitioner failed to rebut the informant's submissions.
Summary
Ravi Jha was charged under IPC sections 363, 366A, 376 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6 for alleged offences involving theft, kidnapping for sexual assault and rape of a minor. He applied for regular bail for the second time after a prior bail application was rejected on 21 September 2024. The informant’s counsel submitted that eight charge‑sheet witnesses had been examined and the victim’s mother was now added as a witness, indicating that the trial was close to conclusion. The petitioner’s counsel could not counter the informant’s submission. Considering the earlier denial of bail, the advanced stage of the trial, and the lack of a rebuttal, the court declined to grant bail, rejecting the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the accused in a case involving offences under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act when the trial is nearing its conclusion.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- POCSO
- regular bail
- trial stage
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77821 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2022 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ravi Jha S/O Subodh Jha Resident of Village- Lawapur, Narayan, P.S-
Mahanar, District- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kumari (Minor) Daughter and Guardian of Mukesh Kumar R/O Fatehpur
Kamali, P.S- Mahnar, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dineshwar Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Ruchi Arya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Keshav Bhardwaj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner to seek
regular bail. The Court has gone through the order dated
21.09.2024, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.43603 of
2024 whereby the regular bail of the petitioner was rejected.
4. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant submits that altogether eight charge sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77821 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/2
witnesses were there and they all have been examined but
during the course of trial, the mother of the victim was also
added as a witness. It is thus, submitted that trial is on verge of
conclusion.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the order dated 21.09.2024, passed in
Criminal Miscellaneous No.43603 of 2024, the Court is not
inclined to release the petitioner on bail, accordingly, the prayer
for grant of bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection
with Mahnar P.S. Case No.142 of 2022 (POCSO G.R.
No.32/2024), pending in the court of learned A.D.J.-VI-cum-
Special Judge POCSO at Hajipur, Vaishali.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.