Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner with a bond and specific conditions, finding that the victim’s lack of supportive statement and refusal for examination warranted release pending trial.
Summary
Chandan Kumar was arrested on 7 September 2025 in connection with a POCSO case alleging that he, along with co‑accused, induced and kidnapped a minor girl. The petitioner sought bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the allegations were fabricated; the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNS Act did not support the prosecution and she refused medical and radiological examinations. The State opposed bail, citing the specific allegations in the FIR. The Court noted the victim’s non‑cooperation and the lack of incriminating statements, and consequently granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the lower court.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to the accused in a POCSO case where the victim has not corroborated the prosecution’s allegations?
- Whether the absence of a victim’s statement and refusal for medical examination justify bail under the prevailing statutes?
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 137(2), 183, 3(5), 64, 96
- POCSO Act — s. 4, 6
- Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 — s. 9
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- kidnapping
- minor
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- victim statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82545 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2025 Thana- TARIYANI CHOWK District- Sheohar
======================================================
Chandan Kumar S/O Ramnandan Baitha R/O village - Kasturiya, P. S -
Tariyani, District – Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X D/O Y ,W/O Md. Alamgir R/O village - Kasturiya, P. S - Tariyani, District
– Sheohar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Devendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-01-2026 Heard Mr.Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Anil
Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
07.09.2025 in connection with POCSO Case No. 48 of 2025
arising out of Tariyani P.S.Case No.141 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
11.07.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
137(2),96 and 3(5) of BNS,2023 but the chagesheet has been
submitted under Sections 137(2), 96 and 64 of BNS, 2023,
Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and Section 9 of the Prohibition
of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner is that
he alongwith co-accused person has induced the minor daughter
of the informant and kidnapped her.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82545 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. In fact the
petitioner was in love with the victim girl and victim was
recovered and her statement was recorded under Section 183 of
BNSS, 2023 in which she has not supported the case of the
prosecution, apart from the aforesaid, she has also refused for
her medical examination as well as for her radiological
examination. The police, after investigation, submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 07.09.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and A.P.P. for the
State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR
and there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, the victim has not
stated anything against the petitioner in her statement under
Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 and the victim has refused for her
medical examination as well as radiological examination, 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 Exclusive
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82545 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
Special Judge, POCSO, Sheohar in connection with POCSO
Case No. 48 of 2025 arising out of Tariyani P.S.Case No.141 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.
(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…