Sintu RaiversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83762 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Banka
                 ======================================================
                 Sintu Rai Son of Nandkishor Ray Resident of Village- Hathiya Pathr, P.S.-
                 Fullidumar, District- Banka

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XXX D/o Vishundeo Ray Resident of Village- Khirikol, P.S.- Fullidumar,
                 District- Banka

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-02-2026                  Heard Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned APP for the

                   State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Banka Mahila P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 366(a), 376, 506, 323/34 of

                   the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution in short is that one

                   Pritam Kumar @ Sonu Kumar and the petitioner took the

                   informant on a bike. It is further alleged that Pritam Kumar @

                   Sonu Kumar offered cold drink and after consuming the same,

                   the informant got unconscious. She was taken to Bhagalpur
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83762 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
                                            2/3




          Railway Station and from there she was taken to Vijaynagar in

          the district of Vardhaman. It is further alleged that Pritam

          Kumar @ Sonu Kumar along with others forcefully solemnized

          the marriage of the informant.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. He also submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear

          that the main thrust of allegation is against Pritam Kumar @

          Sonu Kumar, who has forcefully solemnized marriage with the

          informant/victim of this case, and due to that relationship, she is

          pregnant. During the course of investigation, the victim has

          given her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS

          wherein she has reiterated the facts of              the   F.I.R.,   and

          according to that statement also, the role of this petitioner is that

          he, along with Pritam Kumar @ Sonu Kumar have taken her to

          Bhagalpur on a bike. He also submits that save and except for

          this role, there is no allegation against the petitioner. He further

          submits that the co-accused, namely, Sudhu Ray @ Suddu Rai,

          has already been granted bail by this court vide Cr. Misc. No.

          58339 of 2025. He further submits that a statement has been

          made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83762 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since

                     18.06.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                     Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge POCSO,

                     Banka in connection with Banka Mahila P.S. Case No. 25 of

                     2024.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T