Patna High Court
Mohan RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Mohan Ray petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory bail after learning that he was named in an FIR alleging attempted sexual assault of an 11‑year‑old girl, the informant's minor granddaughter. The prosecution charged him under Sections 75, 76, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 12 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner claimed innocence and clean antecedents, asserting false implication. The State and the informant opposed bail, highlighting the specific accusations and the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. The Court, considering the gravity of the offences and the direct nature of the allegations, rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged attempted sexual assault of a minor under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- POCSO Act
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80245 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Mohan Ray S/o Late Ram Avtar Ray Resident of Village- Baghara, P.S.-
Mohanpur, Dist.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Parwati Devi W/o Brajesh Ray Resident of Village- Baghara, P.S.-
Mohanpur, Dist.- Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Vatsal Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant/Opposite
Party No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 75, 76, 352,
351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 12 of the
POCSO Act.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the
F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80245 of 2025(4) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
attempted to sexually assault the minor grand daughter f the
informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean
antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 have
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
and there is specific accusation that this petitioner, along with
other F.I.R. named accused persons, tried to sexually assault the
minor granddaughter of the informant. The victim in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. has
supported the prosecution case and the learned trial court has
assessed the age of victim as 11 years.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence
and statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the
B.N.S.S., the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80245 of 2025(4) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…