Patna High Court
Sandeep Sah @ Sanjit Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, imposing conditions to ensure his appearance and prevent tampering with evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Sah, was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he entered a house and attempted to tease a minor girl, with charges under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner claimed the allegations stemmed from a personal land dispute, highlighted a five‑day delay in filing the FIR, and noted that the victim’s statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. made no mention of sexual assault. The State opposed bail, while the informant’s counsel did not dispute the absence of a sexual assault allegation. The court, noting the lack of sexual assault allegation, the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial custody since September 2025, and the completion of investigation with a charge‑sheet filed, decided to grant bail subject to strict conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, a family member as a surety, regular court appearances, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or committing further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious IPC charges and the nature of the alleged offence
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the claim of false implication affect the bail decision
- Whether the absence of a sexual assault allegation in the victim’s statement under Section 164 influences the bail grant
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(4), 126(2), 127(2), 331(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 164
- pre‑trial custody
- false implication
- land dispute
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78149 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2025 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Sandeep Sah @ Sanjit Kumar Sah S/O Gauri Shankar Sah @ Shankar Sah
R/O Vill.- Parsa Dumariya, P.S.- Majhaulia, Dist.- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sima Devi W/O Prem Shankar Yadav R/O Village- Parsa Dumariya, Ward
No.-6, P.O.- P.S- Majhaulia, Distt.- West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with
Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 467 of 2025 (SGR No. 68/2025) for the
offence punishable under sections 126(2), 127(2) 115(4),
331(4), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS lodged on 13.07.2025 by
the informant.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against
the petitioner is that he surreptitiously entered into the house of
the informant and tried to tease her minor daughter who was
sleeping in her room. It is further alleged that the family
members of the informant was threatened of dire consequences
at the end of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78149 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the
petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of
personal grudge and there is a delay of five days in lodging of
the FIR. It is next submitted that the victim has got her
statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C/183 BNSS and
there is no allegation of sexual assault having been made against
this petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that because of
certain land dispute between the parties owing to which, the
petitioner has falsely been implicated. Lastly, it has been
submitted that the petitioner has remained under judicial
custody since 25.09.2025.
5. Pursuant to the notice issued vide order dated
22.01.2026 to the Opposite Party No.2/informant, the informant
has entered appearance through Sri Shyam Sunder, learned
counsel, who opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute
the factual position that there is no sexual assault having been
made upon the victim.
6. Learned APP vehemently opposes the prayer for
bail.
7. Considering the statement recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C/183 BNSS, where there is no allegation of sexual
assault having been made against this petitioner and the fact that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78149 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
3/4
the petitioner has remained under judicial custody since
25.09.2025, the investigation is completed and the charge-sheet
has been filed, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege
of bail.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with
two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Special Judge, POCSO-cum-DASJ 6th, West Champaran at
Bettiah, in connection with aforesaid PS Case, subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the
family member/relative of the petitioner(s)
who shall provide official document to show
his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear
on each and every date before the Trial
Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason
will entail cancellation of his/their bail bond
by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no
way try to induce or promise or threat the
witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78149 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
4/4
from committing any criminal offence again,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of his/their bail
bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U
Checking your session…