Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ranjan Kumar @ Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

Bail was denied as the allegations of sexual assault under the POCSO Act and the seriousness of the offences warranted continued custody.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjan Kumar, was arrested on 21 June 2025 in connection with a case alleging attempted rape under Section 65(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner entered the victim's house on 20 June 2025, attempted to rape her, fled when the victim's father intervened, and was later apprehended by villagers. The petitioner claimed he has a clean record, was falsely implicated due to village politics, and that the FIR is fabricated. The State opposed bail, citing a contemporaneous medical examination that showed recent signs of sexual assault. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the offences and the medical evidence, refused the bail application, leaving the petitioner in custody pending trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under Section 65(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 4 of the POCSO Act in view of the alleged sexual assault.
  • Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficient to deny bail despite the accused's claim of innocence and clean antecedents.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • sexual assault
  • POCSO
  • Section 65(1) BNS
  • criminal procedure
  • custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84342 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-419 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjan Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Son of Virendra Choudhary @ Vilendra
                 Choudhary Resident of Village - Jagpur, P.S. - Makhdumpur, Dist. -
                 Jehanabad.
                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     X C/o Sanjay Kumar R/o Village - Dayabigha, P.S. - Makdhumpur, Dist. -
                  Jehanabad.
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Amrendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   25-03-2026                     Heard Mr. Amrendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   21.06.2025 in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 419

                   of 2025 for the offence punishable under Section 65(1) of BNS

                   and Section 4 of POCSO Act.

                               3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 20.06.2025

                   at about 10.00 AM after finding the victim the petitioner entered

                   into her house. It is further alleged that the petitioner tried to

                   rape the victim in the meantime the father of the victim came

                   there and petitioner tried to fled away. But with the help of

                   villager they caught the petitioner and handed over him to the

                   police.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84342 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026
                                                      2/2




                    petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has

                    falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further

                    submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and

                    fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

                    alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted that due to village

                    politics petitioner has been implicated in the present case.

                                5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

                    State on the basis of material available on record and the case

                    diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

                    petitioner and submits that on the same day i.e., 20.06.2025, the

                    medical examination was conducted and the doctor opined that

                    there is recent sign of sexual assault and rape has also been

                    committed.

                                 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                    I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection

                    with Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 419 of 2025 pending in the

                    court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum Special

                    Judge (POCSO), Jehanabad.

                                 7. Prayer is refused.



                                           (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.