Patna High Court
Muni Lal Yadav @ Munna YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions.
Summary
Muni Lal Yadav was arrested on 25‑02‑2025 in connection with a FIR alleging rape, caste‑based insults and offences under the BNS, POCSO and SC/ST Acts. The petitioner pleaded that the FIR was fabricated, he has a clean antecedent and the victim’s medical examination showed no signs of rape. The prosecution presented the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNS, while the trial court report indicated that no prosecution witnesses had yet been examined. The petitioner argued that the trial was likely to be prolonged and that bail was warranted given the lack of evidentiary support. The High Court, considering the clean antecedent, the medical report and the pending status of the trial, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions for cooperation and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the seriousness of the charges under the BNS, POCSO and SC/ST Acts
- Whether the absence of medical evidence of rape and the pending trial justify bail
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and alleged political motivation affect the bail decision
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 351(2), 351(3), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)(a)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- POCSO Act
- SC/ST Act
- false FIR
- criminal antecedent
- trial delay
- caste insult
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81925 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Muni Lal Yadav @ Munna Yadav S/O Late Upendra Prasad Yadav @ Late
Upendra Yadav Resident of Village - Rounia Ward No.-2, P.S- Barari, Distt.-
Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nilam Devi W/O Sanjay Rabidas Resident of Village - Rounia, P.S- Barari,
Distt.- Katihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md Musowir, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 25-03-2026 Heard Mr.Md Musowir, learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Sadanand
Paswan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
25.02.2025 in connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025,
F.I.R. dated 24.02.2025 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 65(1),351(2),(3)of BNS and Sections 4/6 of the
POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2)(v)(a) of SC/ST Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he took
away the victim and committed rape with her and used caste-
related words against the victim’s family.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81925 of 2025(5) dt.25-03-2026
2/4
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation
as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and due to
village politics, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the
present case, apart from that, the date of occurrence as alleged
in the FIR is 24.02.2025 and medical examination of the victim
was conducted on the same day but no sign of rape was found
on the person of the victim. The police, after investigation,
submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner and the
petitioner is in custody since 25.02.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of the
material available on the record and the case diary, have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the statement of the victim under Section 183 of
BNSS, 2023 was recorded in which she has fully supported the
case of the prosecution.
6. Vide order dated 18.02.2026, a report was called for
with regard to the present stage of the trial. Report of the
learned Trial Court dated 02.03.2026 reveals that the case is
pending for evidence on behalf of the prosecution and no
witness has been examined as yet.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81925 of 2025(5) dt.25-03-2026
3/4
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
view of the report of the learned Trial Court that there is no
chance of early conclusion of the trial in near future and
petitioner is in custody since 25.02.2025 more than one year,
apart from that, medical report does not support the allegation as
alleged in the FIR.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean
antecedent as well as the report of the learned Trial Court, 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 learned District &
Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Judge, POCSO,
Katihar in connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025,
with 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81925 of 2025(5) dt.25-03-2026
4/4
(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
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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…