Patna High Court
Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted, subject to a bond and sureties, under the provisions of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar, was named in an FIR for allegedly taking a nude video of the informant under the false pretext of marriage, alleged to have occurred in February 2021. The complaint was filed on 9 September 2024, resulting in a three‑and‑a‑half‑year delay, and the petitioner contended that the informant was a major at the time and the case was filed to recover money spent on marriage negotiations. The prosecution argued that the act was committed when the informant was a minor, invoking sections of the POCSO Act, the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the IT Act. The petitioner sought bail, arguing the delay and the nature of the dispute. The court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act and related statutes despite a significant delay in filing the complaint.
- Whether the alleged age of the informant at the time of the purported act makes the offence fall within the ambit of the POCSO Act.
- Whether the delay of three and a half years in lodging the FIR affects the merits of the bail application.
- Whether the allegations constitute a cognizable offence warranting pre‑trial detention.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 296, 318(4), 64
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 67, 67-B
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- sexual offences
- delay in filing
- false pretext marriage
- nude video
- IT Act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80119 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar, S/o Sahtu Bhagat @ Sahatu Bhagat, R/o Village-Anandi
Chapra, P.S.- Sabebganj, Dist.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX, D/o Upendra Bhagat, R/o Village-Kodariya Mango, P.S.- Paroo, Dist.-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP
For the Informant/OP. No.2: Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly assisted by
learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Paroo P.S. Case
No.63 of 2025 arising out of Complaint Case No.342 of 2024
registered under Sections 296, 64, 318(4) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘B.N.S.’) as well as Sections 4,
12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in
short ‘POCSO Act’), Sections 67 and 67-B of the Information
and Technology Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80119 of 2025(4) dt.26-02-2026
2/4
3. As per FIR, which is based upon Complaint Case
No.342 of 2024 lodged before POCSO Court No.-II,
Muzaffarpur, the petitioner established physical relationship
with informant since February, 2021 on the false pretext of
marriage after taking her nude video while she was in her
bathroom.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioner that for the occurrence, which alleged to be taken
place in the month of February, 2021, the FIR was lodged on
the basis of complaint, which was filed on 9 th September, 2024
i.e. after three and half years. It is submitted that the delay
not appears properly explained through complaint petition. It is
submitted that in fact the marriage of petitioner was
negotiated with informant and when for any of the social
reasons, the said marriage could not finalize, the present false
case was lodged particularly, for the recovery of Rs. 5 lakhs
spent on the occasion of marriage negotiation and for
purchasing certain gifts. It is submitted that the victim was
major even on the first date of occurrence and in support of his
submission, learned counsel drawn attention of this Court
towards paragraph No.82 of the case diary, where a reference
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80119 of 2025(4) dt.26-02-2026
3/4
of statement of the victim as recorded under Section 180 of
the BNNS was taken into consideration, where she has
categorically stated that her nude photographs was taken in
the month of May-June, 2023 by the petitioner and
relationship was established in the month of month of May or
June, 2024, therefore, even on the first date when the alleged
photographs of victim was taken, she was of 18 years and
three months. It is submitted that lodging of this case under
POCSO Act is only to aggravate the allegation and, therefore,
the cause of action was made through complaint petition
saying that occurrence took place in February, 2021, which
appears incorrect in view of aforementioned facts.
5. Arguing further, it is further submitted that the
informant herself refused to join the medical examination in
support of allegation.
6. Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Nachiketa Jha,
learned counsel appearing for the informant while opposing the
prayer of bail submitted that the allegation is specifically
against the petitioner. It is submitted that the date on which
the photographs was taken, the victim was minor as per
complaint petition.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80119 of 2025(4) dt.26-02-2026
4/4
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as primarily the dispute raised in the
background of negotiation of marriage and for the recovery of
gifts and cash spent on marriage negotiation day, accordingly,
the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from
today, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Court POCSO-II,
Muzaffarpur in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No.63 of 2025
arising out of Complaint Case No.342 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (in short ‘CrPC’)/under Section 482(2) of
the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…