Patna High Court
Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, was arrested on 6 September 2025 in connection with a case filed under Sections 88 and 96 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that he had a physical relationship with the victim under the pretext of marriage, demanded dowry, and threatened to kill her father and sister. The petitioner contended that the FIR was false, he has a clean antecedent, and the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S indicated a consensual temple marriage and that the case arose from a family dispute over an arranged marriage. Both the informant’s counsel and the Additional Public Prosecutor supported the bail application. The court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering of evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving offences under Sections 88 and 96 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and Sections 3,4,5,6,8 of the POCSO Act?
- Whether the allegations of dowry demand and threats affect the grant of bail?
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S and the existence of a compromise petition influence bail eligibility?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 183, 88, 96
- POCSO Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- dowry demand
- false FIR
- compromise petition
- criminal antecedent
- Section 183
- Section 88 BNS
- Section 96 BNS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78583 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar Son of Laturi Yadav @ Gore Lal Yadav @ Latoriya Resident
of village - Domachak, P.O.- Laxmipur, Police Station - Laxmipur, District -
Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Komal Kumari Daughter of Satpal Yadav Resident of Village - Nand Lal
Mishra Lane Gali, Bari Khanjarpur, Police Station - Barari, District -
Bhagalpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
For the Informant : Ms. Sweety Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard Dr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Ms. Sweety Sinha, learned counsel for the
informant and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
06.09.2025 in connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 149 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 26.05.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 88 and 96 of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4,
5/6 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78583 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/4
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner had
established physical relation with the victim on the pretext of
marriage and later on cancelled the marriage on non-
fulfillment of demand of dowry. It is further alleged that the
petitioner threatened her to kill her father and sister.
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. In fact, the
petitioner was in love with the victim girl and victim has been
recovered and her statement was recorded under Section 183
of the B.N.S.S in which she has stated that she has performed
marriage with the petitioner in the temple and thereafter, the
family member of the petitioner refused to perform their
arranged marriage and due to this reason the present F.I.R has
been lodged. Thereafter, both the parties have filed
compromise petition before the trial court and the petitioner is
ready to keep the victim as his wife. The petitioner is in
custody since 06.09.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor support the contention
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78583 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
3/4
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 Exclusive Special Court of POCSO-cum-District
and Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bhagalpur in connection
with Barari P.S. Case No. 149 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78583 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
4/4
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…