Satyam Kumar @ Sastanand Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4656 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Satyam Kumar @ Sastanand Kumar S/O Upendra Pandit R/O Vill.- Manserpur, Ward No.07, P.O- Parharpur, P.S- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

XX D/O Vijay Tanti R/O Village- Manserpur, P.O- Paharpur, P.S- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amritesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 83 of 2025, registered for the offence under Section 68(1) of the B.N.S. and section 4/8 of the POCSO Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 16.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 43839 of 2025 which reads as follows:- "Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody since 12.03.2025, seeks regular bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 83 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4656 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026 2/2 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4/8 of the POCSO Act.

3. The petitioner is accused of committing rape with a minor victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no external injury upon the victim and therefore the allegations of rape is false.

5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. I have heard and considered the submissions of the parties. Even if it is a case of consensual sex, it is with a minor girl, therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail if the trial is delayed."

4. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Ranjeet/- U T