Patna High Court
Bhola BhuiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was denied as the allegations of child rape were deemed serious and supported by medical and testimonial evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhola Bhuiyan, was arrested in September 2024 on charges of raping a seven‑year‑old girl, alleged to be the daughter of an informant, under Section 65(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. He applied for bail, claiming false implication and arguing that the alleged incident was implausible given his marital status and lack of prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the heinous nature of the offence, the victim’s corroboration under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S., and supporting medical evidence. The Court examined the seriousness of the child sexual offence, the statutory provisions, and the need to protect the victim and ensure trial integrity. Concluding that the allegations were grave and the evidence substantial, the Court denied bail and directed the trial court to expedite the trial within six months. The bail petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate bail jurisprudence for offences under Section 65(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act?
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedent warrants grant of bail?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 65(2)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- child rape
- sexual offences
- criminal procedure
- judicial discretion
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8927 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2024 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Bhola Bhuiyan, son of Late Brichman Singh, resident of village Pranchak,
P.S. Imamganj, District Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
6 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Section 65 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
said to have committed rape with the daughter of the informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
present case and no offence has been committed by him. It is
further submitted that the very story that the victim girl was
taken to the house of the petitioner and rape was committed
there, does not seem to be believable in view of the fact that the
petitioner is a married man with the family.The petitioner has no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8927 of 2025(6) dt.19-02-2026
2/2
criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since
09.09.2024.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing
the bail petition submitted that it is a heinous offence where a
seven years old girl has been ravished and she has supported
the accusation under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. and
further medical report also supports the oral allegations.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering the seriousness
of the allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the learned
Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as it is a case under
the POCSO Act and conclude the trial preferably within a period
of six months.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Trivedi/-
U T
Checking your session…