Patna High Court
Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court held that bail may be granted to the accused despite the serious nature of the charges, given the clean antecedent, filing of a chargesheet, and lack of medical evidence, subject to stringent conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjan Kumar, was arrested on 26‑08‑2025 in connection with a POCSO case (No. 71 of 2025) alleging outraging the modesty of a minor girl under Sections 75, 76, 79, 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner pleaded that he has a clean antecedent and that the allegations are false, noting that the victim refused a medical examination. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s support for the prosecution despite the refusal for medical examination. The Court examined the fact that a chargesheet had already been filed, the petitioner’s clean record, and the lack of any substantive medical evidence, and held that bail could be granted subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, the Court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a POCSO case involving offences under Sections 75, 76, 79, 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim’s refusal to undergo a medical examination affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the filing of a chargesheet are sufficient grounds for bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- outraging modesty
- victim refusal medical examination
- clean antecedent
- chargesheet
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82403 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Ranjan Kumar S/o- Shri Sugriv Chauhan R/v- Farper Ps- Ariyari Dist-
Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o- Chottan Chauhan R/v- Farper Ps- Ariyari Dist- Sheikhpura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate
: Mr. Mudit Meet, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-01-2026 Heard Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
26.08.2025 in connection with POCSO Case No. 71 of 2025
arising out of Mahila P.S.Case No.26 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
25.08.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
75,76,79,352 and 351(2) of BNS,2023 and Section 8 of the
POCSO Act.
3. As per FIR, there is specific allegation against the
petitioner for outraging modesty of victim girl.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82403 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
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. Although
the victim has supported her case in her statement under Section
183 of BNSS, 2023 but she has refused for her medical
examination in front of her mother which suggests that the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against
the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
victim has supported the case of the prosecution but fairly
submits that she refused for her medical examination.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean
antecedent and the police has already submitted the chargesheet,
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 and
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge
(POCSO), Sheikhpura in connection with POCSO Case No. 71
of 2025 arising out of Mahila P.S.Case No.26 of 2025, with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82403 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
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.
(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…