Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the allegations were serious and the victim’s statement under Section 180 of the BNSS was deemed reliable.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Patel, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging that he and co‑accused used obscene language and attempted to lure a minor girl into a forest. The FIR was lodged twelve days after the alleged incident, and the petitioner argued that the delay rendered the complaint unreliable and that the allegations were vague and unsupported. The State opposed the bail, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The Court examined whether the nature of the accusation and the recorded statement justified granting anticipatory bail under the BNSS and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Finding the allegations serious and the victim’s statement credible, the Court refused anticipatory bail. The bail application was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the FIR alleges offences under Sections 75(2), 78, 79, 351(1), 127(1), 115(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
- Whether the twelve‑day delay in lodging the FIR defeats the prosecution’s case and warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 127(1), 3(5), 351(1), 75(2), 78, 79
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- POCSO
- delay in FIR
- sexual offences
- victim statement
- Section 180
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89699 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Patel S/o Raj Patel @ Raj Kumar Prasad @
Raju Patel Resident of vill- Dhobani, ward no. 1, P.S- Mainatand, Distt.- West
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX D/o Y R/o village - Dhobani, ward no. 1, P.S.- Mainatand, Distt.- West
Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajdeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and leaned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in case registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 75(2), 78, 79, 351(1),
127(1), 115(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and
Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R. is that petitioner along
with co-accused persons abused the informant in filthy language
and tried to take her to forest but she somehow managed to
escape.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89699 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/2
the F.I.R. was lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay
of 12 days as the occurrence is said to have taken place on
13.07.2025, whereas the present F.I.R. was lodged on
22.07.2025 after due thought and deliberation. Allegation
against petitioner is general and omnibus and there is no specific
accusation of any overt act against him. Petitioner claims clean
antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application of the petitioner and submitted that the
victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS
supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and
statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…