Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to monetary bond and specific conditions.
Summary
Raushan Kumar was arrested on 22 July 2025 in connection with a Mahila Police Station case alleging offences under Sections 376, 354(C)/34 of the IPC and Sections 66(C) and 67(D) of the Information Technology Act, involving alleged sexual relations with a married woman and the taking of private photographs. The prosecution contended that the petitioner, through a friend, threatened to disseminate the photographs, while the petitioner claimed the allegations were fabricated and asserted a clean antecedent. The petitioner sought bail, arguing false implication and lack of evidence, whereas the State opposed the bail application. The Court examined the seriousness of the charges, the petitioner’s custody duration, and the need to ensure trial cooperation. It granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of personal appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged rape, sexual assault, and offences under the IT Act.
- Whether the seriousness of the charges and the petitioner’s custody period justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 354(C), 376
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(C), 67(D)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- sexual assault
- Information Technology Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- pre‑trial detention
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78469 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Raushan Kumar Son of Bhola Chaudhary R/O Village- Chakdah Town, P.S.-
Madhubani, Distt.- Madhubani, State- Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
22.07.2025 in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024,
F.I.R. dated 30.06.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 376, 354(C)/34 of the IPC and Section 66(C) and
67(D) of the I.T. Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant was a
married lady but living separately from her husband and this
petitioner on the pretext of marriage established physical
relation with the informant. It is further alleged that the
petitioner's friend took her private photos and threatened her for
making those pictures viral.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78469 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. 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. It appears from the F.I.R
itself that the informant/victim is a married lady and how can
anyone assured her for performing marriage with her when she
was already married. It also appears from the F.I.R that she
alleged that the petitioner has given her assurance that he will
perform marriage with her. Apart from the aforesaid, the
informant has a daughter aged about 5-6 months. He further
submits that the informant has supported the case of the
prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the
Cr.P.C/183 of the B.N.S.S. He further submits that the police
after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 22.07.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78469 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
Sadar, Sitamarhi in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 31 of
2024, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…