Patna High Court
Rajendra PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 480(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and additional safeguards.
Summary
Petitioner Rajendra Prasad was arrested in connection with offences alleged under Sections 77, 79, 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution alleged that he engaged in obscene conversations with an informant and circulated her photograph on Telegram. The petitioner claimed innocence, argued that the informant was not a minor, that no POCSO offence was made out, and highlighted his clean antecedent and the filing of a charge‑sheet after a prolonged custody since 17‑05‑2025. The State and the second opposite party opposed bail. Considering the nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s clean record, the existence of a charge‑sheet and the period of custody, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and additional safeguards.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, POCSO Act and IT Act
- Whether the informant qualifies as a minor for the purposes of the POCSO Act
- Whether the filing of a charge‑sheet and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify bail despite the nature of the allegations
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351(2), 352, 480(3), 77, 79
- Information Technology Act — s. 66E, 67
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 8
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- POCSO Act
- Information Technology Act
- obscene communication
- minor
- charge sheet
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84305 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Rajendra Prasad S/O Late Ramji Prasad R/O Vill./Mohalla- Anaith Mathiya,
Nawada, P.S.- Ara Nawada, Dist.- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Khushi Kumari Daughter of Deepak Kumar Resident of Village Aannd
Nagar, P.S.- Nagar, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Humayou Khan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite
party no. 2.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025
registered for the alleged offences under Sections 77, 79,
351(2), 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 8 of the
POCSO Act and Section 66(E) and 67 of the Information
Technology Act.
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner entered into
obscene talks with the informant as the informant had earlier
been working in the office of the petitioner. The petitioner also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84305 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
put a photograph of the informant on telegram.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. No occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken
place. The petitioner has earlier lodged Ara Nawada P.S. Case
No. 322 of 2025 against the informant which is the true version
of the case. Learned counsel further submits that from the facts
of the case, it is apparent that no offence is made out. The
informant is not a minor and no offence under POCSO Act is
made out. The petitioner has got clean antecedent and is in
custody since 17.05.2025. Charge-sheet has been submitted.
05. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2 opposes the
submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Leaned counsel for
the opposite party no. 2 submits that the petitioner does not
deserve bail.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
nature of allegation and further considering the period of
custody of the petitioner and his clean antecedent along with
submission of charge-sheet, the petitioner above named is
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84305 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act, Bhojpur at Ara in
connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025,
subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of BNSS
and the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of
the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioner will be liable to be
cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…