Patna High Court
Lalu Kumar @ Laloo KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, finding that the seriousness of the alleged offences precludes the grant of bail.
Summary
Lalu Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he, along with co‑accused, took the informant's minor daughter to Saharsa and raped her, invoking sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The petitioner pleaded innocence, claiming the relationship was consensual, that he had no prior criminal record and was detained merely on suspicion. The prosecution, supported by the victim’s statement under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, argued that the allegations were specific and serious. The court examined the gravity of the offences, the nature of the accusations and the victim’s corroborative statement. Concluding that the seriousness of the charges warranted custody, the court denied bail and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged rape of a minor under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, POCSO Act and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 70(2)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- SC/ST Act
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
- Indian criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79799 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saharsa
======================================================
Lalu Kumar @ Laloo Kumar Son of Sudish Yadav R/o Vill. - Chakla Binni
Tola, P.S. - Baijnathpur, Dist. - Saharsa, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjula Devi Wife of Arun Ram R/o Village - Barahi Dhan Chhoha, P.S. -
Baijnathpur, Dist. - Saharsa.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused
the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Saharsa Mahila P.S. Case No. 16 of 2025, instituted for the
offences punishable under Sections 70(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act,
Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes of Prevention of Atrocities Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner
along with other co-accused persons took minor daughter of the
informant to Saharsa and committed rape upon her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79799 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/2
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the
petitioner has been arrested only on the basis of suspicion. It is
further submitted that the victim has stated that she and the
petitioner were in love and she on her own will made physical
relationship with her. The petitioner is in custody since
15.05.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the petitioner and submitted that there is specific
allegation levelled against the petitioner of committing rape
upon the victim. It is further submitted that the victim has
supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under
Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…