Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79777 of 2024
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Vikash Kumar S/o- Narayan Bind Village- Sahe-Bahe, Ps-Chainpur Dist-
                 Kaimur at Bhabua

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Rinki Kumari D/o- Sudarshan Bind Village- Sahe-Bahe, Ps-Chainpur Dist-
                 Kaimur at Bhabua

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 and learned counsel for the

                   State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Bhabhua Mahila P.S. Case No. 19 of 2024, lodged on

                   03.05.2024, under Sections 342, 323, 365, 366(A), 376(D), 506

                   and 34 of the Indian Penal Code & under Sections 4 and 6 of the

                   POCSO Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   allegation made by the informant/victim is that the petitioner,

                   along with others, have committed rape upon her. Counsel

                   further submits that the case has been filed after 13 days from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79777 of 2024(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                            2/3




          the date of occurrence. Counsel also submits that it is an out and

          out false case and the name of the petitioner and others has been

          falsely inserted. They are residents of the same village. It is

          stated that the medical report is completely in contradiction to

          the allegations made and, therefore, the petitioner deserves bail.

                       4. Upon the specific query of the Court as to why the

          informant has inserted the name of the accused petitioner only,

          in reply thereto, counsel submits that it is a fit case in which

          only and only the medical evidence should be looked into, and

          the medical evidence is completely in contradiction with the

          allegations made in the FIR.

                       5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently

          opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is a true case and

          the informant has categorically alleged the name of the

          petitioner in this case. He further submits that the age of the

          victim is only 16 years.

                       6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer

          for bail and submits that the allegations made in the FIR are in

          complete corroboration with the statement made under Section

          164 of the Cr.P.C., wherein the prosecutrix has alleged that the

          accused persons, including the petitioner, committed rape upon

          her.
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79777 of 2024(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                                      3/3




                                 7. In the present facts and circumstances of the case

                    and the submissions made above, particularly when the

                    petitioner is not in a position to explain before the Court as to

                    why his name has been inserted in this case, and also as the FIR

                    and the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. are against

                    him, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                    Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby

                    rejected.



                                                                         (Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-

U     T