Patna High Court
Gaurav Kumar @ Gora SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court denied regular bail to the petitioner at this stage of the proceedings.
Summary
The petitioner, Gaurav Kumar, was charged under IPC Section 354A, several provisions of the SC/ST Act, and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act for allegedly raping the minor daughter of an informant. He applied for regular bail, arguing that five prosecution witnesses had turned hostile and that no family members of the victim had been examined. The State opposed bail, relying on the victim’s statement under Section 164 of the CrPC and a medical report indicating forced sexual intercourse. After hearing both sides, the Court refused to grant bail, noting the seriousness of the offence and the victim’s corroborative evidence. The Court allowed the petitioner to renew the bail application after six months or after the victim’s examination, whichever is earlier, and directed the trial court to complete the trial within the time limit prescribed under Section 35 of the POCSO Act.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused in a POCSO rape case involving a minor.
- Whether the presence of hostile witnesses and the lack of examination of victim’s family members affect the bail decision.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC and the medical examination report justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 354A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12, 35, 8
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO Act
- SC/ST Act
- IPC 354A
- criminal procedure
- victim testimony
- hostile witnesses
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88851 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2024 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Gaurav Kumar @ Gora Singh S/O Sanjay Singh Resident of Village- Ekmba,
P.S- Fatehpur, Distt.- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX S/O YYY R/O Village- Ekmba, P.S- Fatehpur, Distt.- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nazia Shabah, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in connection
with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2024 instituted for the offence
under Sections 354 A of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s), 3
(2) va of SC/ST Act and Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner has committed rape with the minor daughter of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. Learned counsel for
the petitioner has submitted that a report regarding stage of trial was
called and it is apparent that altogether five witnesses have been
examined all have turned hostile but from the report it also transpires
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88851 of 2025(6) dt.06-05-2026
2/2
that no family members of the victim has still been examined.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer of regular bail and has submitted that from
perusal of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., it
is clear that she has categorically stated that the petitioner has
committed rape with her and from perusal of the medical
examination report also, it is clear that the victim was subjected to
forcefull sexual intercourse.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case as stated above,
this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage
and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail after six months or after the examination of the victim
if she does not support the case of the prosecution, whichever is
earlier.
8. Learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial
within the time frame prescribed under Section 35 of the POCSO
Act.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.