Patna High Court
Dhirendra Lal Harijan @ Dhirendra Prasad ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied as the court found the allegations of kidnapping and rape of a minor under the POCSO Act to be serious and supported by the victim’s statement and witness testimony.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhirendra Lal Harijan, was arrested on 29 October 2024 in connection with a POCSO case alleging that he kidnapped and raped a 14‑year‑old girl with the intention of marriage. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was false, delayed, and based merely on suspicion. The State, through the informant’s counsel and the Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed bail, citing the victim’s recorded statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, which alleged rape and kidnapping, and noting that six of eight charge‑sheet witnesses had already been examined. The court considered the seriousness of the offences under the POCSO Act and the corroborative evidence from the victim and witnesses. Concluding that the allegations were substantiated and the offence grave, the court refused bail and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a POCSO case involving alleged kidnapping and rape of a minor.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the alleged lack of substantive evidence justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 183
- BNS — s. 137(2), 351(2), 352, 96
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 115(2), 126(2), 127(4), 137(2), 351(3), 352, 4, 6, 65(1), 96
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- kidnapping
- rape
- minor
- criminal procedure
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78053 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- TERHAGACHH District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Dhirendra Lal Harijan @ Dhirendra Prasad Manjhi S/o Labanu Lal Harijan @
Shree Prasad Manjhi Resident of Village- Farabari, P.S.- Terhagachh, District-
Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sima Devi W/o Shrawan Lal Harijan R/o Harhariya Baans, P.S.-
Terhagachh, District- Kishanganj
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha,Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-03-2026 Heard Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Bhanu
Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
29.10.2024 in connection with POCSO Case No. 11 of 2025
arising out of Terhagachh P.S. Case No. 122 of 2024, F.I.R.
dated 28.10.2024 registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 137(2), 96, 352, 351(2) of BNS but the cognizance has
been taken against the petitioner under Sections 137(2),
96,126(2),127(4),65(1),115(2),351(3), 352 of the POCSO Act
and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78053 of 2025(3) dt.23-03-2026
2/3
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he
kidnapped and raped the minor victim girl who is aged about 14
years with the intention of marriage.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation
as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and he has
been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of
suspicion. It appears from the FIR that the date of occurrence as
alleged in the FIR is 23.09.2024 but the present FIR has been
instituted on 28.10.2024 after delay of 35 days without giving
any explanation of delay.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of
BNSS,2023 in which she has categorically stated that the
petitioner has committed rape upon her, apart from aforesaid,
the victim has also stated that the petitioner has kidnapped her
and on the date of occurrence the victim was minor. Learned
counsel for the informant further submits that the trial has begun
and out of eight chargesheet witnesses, six witnesses have been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78053 of 2025(3) dt.23-03-2026
3/3
examined.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and the nature of
allegation against the petitioner which is supported by the
victim, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
connection with POCSO Case No. 11 of 2025 arising out of
Terhagachh P.S. Case No. 122 of 2024 pending in the court of
learned Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO), Kishanganj.
7. Prayer is refused.
8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.