Patna High Court
Manish ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
Summary
Manish Thakur was arrested in connection with a rape alleged to have occurred on 8 October 2024, for which an FIR was lodged on 10 October 2024 under Sections 126(2), 127(2) and 70(2) of the BNS. The victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS differed from the FIR, alleging that the husband was tied up and the rape was committed at gunpoint, while the defense claimed the case was fabricated due to an extramarital affair. The petitioner’s counsel highlighted the two‑day delay in filing the FIR, the absence of any injury on medical examination, and doubts about the petitioner’s identification. The State contended that the offence was a gang rape and opposed bail. The Court, noting the prima facie version recorded under Section 183, the completed investigation, the petitioner’s prolonged custody since November 2024, and the likelihood of a delayed trial, granted bail subject to conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 480(3) of the BNSS. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed compliance conditions for the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a rape case where the FIR was lodged after a delay and the victim’s statement under Section 183 differs from the FIR.
- Whether the differences in the victim’s statements and lack of medical injuries create sufficient doubt to merit bail.
- Whether the identification of the accused is reliable enough to deny bail.
- Whether the completion of investigation and the prospect of a prolonged trial justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164, 437(3)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- FIR delay
- victim statement
- identification doubt
- medical evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89056 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2024 Thana- GWALPARA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Manish Thakur, Son of Dhunmun Thakur Resident of village - Gwalpura
Ward No.- 6, P.S.- Gwalpara, District – Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bambahadur Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gwalpara
P.S. Case No. 208 of 2024 registered for the offence under
Sections 126(2), 127(2) and 70(2) of the BNS.
3. The accused/petitioner named in the F.I.R. and is in
custody since 24.11.2024.
4. As per FIR, petitioner alongwith co-accused persons
committed rape upon the informant aged about 25 years, who is
married and wife of one Siyaram Suthiar.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that the statement of victim who is the author of
present FIR improved on major aspects of the occurrence while
recording her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C./183 of the
BNSS qua the manner of the occurrence, what she narrated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89056 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
through FIR. It is pointed out that FIR in issue was lodged with a
delay of two days i.e. for occurrence dated 08.10.2024, the FIR
was lodged on 10.10.2024. It is submitted that as per FIR, the
husband of the informant was confined in the house whereas as
per 183 statement, he was took outside the room and was tied
with a tree by rope and, thereafter the rape was committed upon
the informant on gun point. It is submitted that in fact it is a case
of extra marital affairs and when the relationship came into
knowledge of the husband of the informant/victim, the present
false case was lodged.
6. Arguing further, it is submitted that even the
identification of petitioner appears doubtful in view of Section 183
of BNSS for the reason that the informant categorically stated
thereof that she identified petitioner by his face as during the
occurrence the mask of the face was removed but through same
statement she also said that she came to know about the name of
the petitioner during the day.
7. It is further argued by learned counsel that upon
medical examination, no injury in or around private part of the
body of victim was noticed, which also creates a doubt qua
allegation of rape. It is also submitted that the delay of two days
as to lodge present FIR after the occurrence is not appears
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89056 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
explained through FIR. While concluding argument, it is submitted
that investigation of this case is already completed, for which
charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of
tampering with the evidence and, moreover, till now only two
prosecution witnesses appears examined in this case, suggesting
sufficiently that trial of this case is not likely to be concluded in
near future.
8. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that allegation of rape is specifically available against
petitioner. It is submitted that this is a case of gang rape.
9. Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as prima facie version of victim while recording
her statement under Section 183 of BNSS, explaining the
occurrence appears improved on major points over the narration
as made available by her while authoring the FIR, coupled with the
fact that investigation of this case completed long back, and the
petitioner remains in custody since 24.11.2024, where trial is also
not likely to conclude in near future, accordingly, petitioner above
named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Gwalpara P.S. Case No. 208 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89056 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
Judge-I cum Special Judge Madhepura/concerned Court, subject to
the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the
Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS, with further conditions that:-
(i) Accused/Petitioner shall cooperate
in the trial and shall be physically present on
each and every date before the Trial Court till
conclusion of the trial and exemption from
physical appearance be allowed by the Trial
Court, only on medical ground of the petitioner
duly supported by the documents.
(ii) If petitioner made any deliberate
attempt to delay trial, State/informant shall be
at liberty to press petition before the learned
trial court for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner by learned trial court itself, which
shall be decided by learned trial court, in
accordance with law after giving fair
opportunity to petitioner.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…