Patna High Court
Angaj Choupal @ Angaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The bail application was rejected; the petitioner was not granted bail.
Summary
Angaj Choupal was arrested in connection with a FIR alleging that he forcibly entered a neighbour's house at night, attempted to disrobe the minor daughter of the informant, and assaulted her, invoking sections of the BNS, 2023 and the POCSO Act. The petitioner contended that the allegations were fabricated, citing lack of medical examination, minimal injuries, and non‑cooperative witnesses, and asserted no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, relying on the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNS. The Patna High Court, after considering the victim’s statement and the seriousness of the charges, refused bail, though it permitted the petitioner to renew the bail application after the charge sheet is filed. The order reflects the court’s cautious approach in cases involving alleged sexual offences against minors.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged sexual assault of a minor under the BNS, 2023 and the POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim’s statement and the nature of the allegations justify denial of bail despite the petitioner’s claim of false implication.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- POCSO
- false implication
- victim statement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90856 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Angaj Choupal @ Angaj Kumar S/O Soman Choupal @ Soman Chaupal R/O
Village- Milki, P.S.- Kamtaul, Post- Chak Tataila, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shree X S/O Late Dhaneshwar Chaupal a
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manish Chandra Gandhi, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Dr. Koushlendra Narayan, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case no.99 of 2025
registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 76, 352, 351(2),
324(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 8 and 12 of POCSO
Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner is alleged to
have forcibly taken victim by entering into informant’s house at
night and attempted to disrobe her with intent to commit rape
and also indulged in assaulting the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90856 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on
baseless and fabricated allegations of taking away the minor
daughter of the informant from her house, attempting to disrobe
her and inappropriately touching her. It is further submitted that
the petitioner and the informant are neighbours and due to
ulterior motive the present F.I.R has been lodged. It is further
submitted that two witnesses to the alleged occurrence, namely
Lakhan Chaupal and Pramila Devi, have not completely
supported the prosecution case during the course of
investigation. Additionally, it is submitted that victim refused to
undergo medical examination. The injury report of the
informant indicates only simple hurt in nature. The petitioner
has remained in custody since 09.10.2025 with no criminal
antecedent. He undertakes to co-operate in case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2 on the ground that petitioner along with co-accused had
subjected the minor daughter of the informant to a form of
sexual assault with the threatening of committing rape upon her
and the said fact has been supported by the victim in her
statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90856 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
circumstances of the case and also considering the statement of
the victim, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at
present and the application is rejected .
7. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to
renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…