Patna High Court
Om ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Om Chaudhary, sought regular bail in a case registered under Section 70(2) of the BNS for alleged involvement in a rape. The prosecution alleged that the victim was taken to a field where Jitendra committed rape, while the petitioner was merely present. The victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS did not accuse the petitioner of rape, only that he was standing there. The petitioner had been in judicial custody since 18‑09‑2025. The State opposed bail, but the court, considering the lack of direct allegation against the petitioner, ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 70(2) of the BNS given the victim's statement does not implicate him directly
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 70(2) BNS
- Section 183 BNSS
- rape allegation
- judicial custody
- bail petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89827 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- KASMA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Om Chaudhary Son of Saryu Chaudhary Resident of Village- Dugul, P.S.-
Kasma, District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX S/O YYY R/O Vill.- Jagroop Bigha, P.S.- Kasma, Dist.- Aurangabad.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 70(2) of the
BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that sister
of the informant has gone to ease her. It is further alleged one
Jitendra and this petitioner took her to Nauwa Aahar and there
Jitendra has committed rape with her, whereas, this petitioner
was standing there.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
during course of investigation victim has given her statement
under Section 183 of the BNSS wherein she has stated that this
petitioner and Jitendra took her forcefully to a field near canal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89827 of 2025(3) dt.13-03-2026
2/2
and Jitendra has committed rape with her. Learned counsel for
the petitioner has submitted that victim herself has not alleged
that the petitioner has committed rape with her. Only role
attributed to this petitioner is that he was also standing there.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the main
thrust of allegation is against Jitendra. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is languishing
in judicial custody since 18.09.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed
the prayer of regular bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on
bail in connection with Kasma P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Aurangabad.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…