Patna High Court
Ravindra PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravindra Paswan, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a FIR (Supaul PS Case No. 368 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 65 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 read with Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. He contended that he has a clean record and that the allegations of raping a minor, including snatching a mobile phone, are false and exaggerated, claiming he was falsely implicated by the informant. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing that the victim is a minor, the offences are serious, and granting bail could enable the petitioner to abscond or tamper with evidence. The Court examined the seriousness of the charges, the vulnerability of the child victim, and the risk of interference with the investigation. Consequently, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused of offences under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and the POCSO Act involving a minor victim.
- Whether the risk of the accused absconding or tampering with evidence justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 3(5), 65
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- POCSO Act
- child sexual abuse
- rape
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86302 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2025 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul
======================================================
Ravindra Paswan Son of Tejeshwai Paswan @ Bindeshwari Paswan @
Tejasvi Paswan R/o Villlage - Laoodh(Ward no. 05), P.S. - Supaul Dist. -
Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mr. X Son of Y R/o N-116/207, J.J. Camp Badli Gaon Samailpur North West
Delhi - 110042
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Supaul P.S. Case No. 368 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 65 and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023 read with Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that he was informed by Child Welfare Committee that
his minor daughter was living in Alpawas, Supaul since
08.07.2025, accordingly he came to meet his daughter who
disclosed that a girl named Madhu resided on rent in a flat near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86302 of 2025(2) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
informant’s house at Delhi and she enticed her and brought her
to village Veena Andoli, Supaul and handed over her to
petitioner and also gave a mobile, but petitioner snatched the
mobile and raped her for several days, further one day petitioner
took her to the market where she met a girl Jyoti and disclosed
about her ordeal, hence Jyoti took her to her house and informed
the police and thereafter the victim was brought to Alpawas.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that allegation of snatching the
mobile and rape is exaggerated. It is also submitted that the
petitioner was known to Madhu and Madhu had brought the
victim to Supaul where the victim stayed at her house for some
times, but then falsely alleged that she was enticed by Madhu
and brought to Sapaul where she was raped.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the anticipatory bail application and submits that victim is a
minor and based on her disclosure, the instant FIR has been
instituted, as such the offence is serious and investigation of the
case is in nascent stages and if privilege of anticipatory bail is
granted to the petitioner, he may abscond or try to tamper with
the evidence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86302 of 2025(2) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…