Patna High Court
Akshay Kumar @ Akshay ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was not granted to the petitioner at this stage, with permission to re‑apply after six months if the trial is not concluded.
Summary
The petitioner, Akshay Kumar, was charged under Section 65(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act for allegedly raping a minor girl in her house. He applied for bail, claiming innocence, lack of criminal antecedents, and alleging inconsistencies in the victim's statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. The State opposed bail, highlighting the medical report showing a ruptured hymen and the direct allegation of rape. The Court noted the seriousness of the POCSO offences and the need for a speedy trial, and therefore refused bail at this stage, allowing the petitioner to re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending. The Court also directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings under Section 35 of the POCSO Act.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of offences under the POCSO Act and B.N.S.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and alleged inconsistencies in the victim's statements affect the bail decision
- Whether medical evidence indicating a ruptured hymen justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 180, 183, 65(2)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 35, 4, 8
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO Act
- medical evidence
- FIR delay
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84908 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Manjhi S/O Jitendra Manjhi R/O Village-
Sidhwalia, P.S- Mohammadpur, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. 'X' D/O Sachidanand Manjhi R/O Village- Sidhwalia, P.S- Mohammadpur,
Distt.- Gopalganj.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate
Mr. Vyas Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 17-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 registered for
the offence punishable under Section 65(2) of the B.N.S., 2023
and Sections 4, 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner entered the house of the informant, who is a minor
girl, while she was alone and committed rape with her.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84908 of 2025(5) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
case, no such occurrence has taken place. He also submits that
during the course of the investigation, the victim has given her
statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS. In
her statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, she
stated that the petitioner entered her house on the pretext of
demanding chili powder and after that closed the door from
inside and committed rape and in her statement recorded under
Section 183 of the BNSS, she also stated the same thing. He
also submits that in the FIR, it is stated that the petitioner
entered the house and committed rape, whereas during the
investigation, this story has been developed that the petitioner
entered on the pretext of demanding chili powder. Moreover, a
statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner
has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial
custody since 31.08.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by the learned
APP for the State and submits that the FIR is not the
encyclopedia of the case of the prosecution and the victim has
only explained the case and has not developed it and from
perusal of the medical examination report also, it transpires that
the doctor conducting the medical examination of the victim has
found the hymen not intact, though there was no external injury
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84908 of 2025(5) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
over the personal area. The learned APP further submits that
there is a direct allegation against this petitioner of entering into
the house and committing rape with the victim.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is a delay in filing of the FIR, but countering this, the
learned APP for the State submits that it is a case of village
background and this delay has been caused as the father of the
informant was not at home.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage,
however, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for
bail after six months if the trial is not concluded in the said
period.
8. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial
in view of the Section 35 of the POCSO Act and conclude the
same in the prescribed period.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…