Rahul Kumar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5004 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2024 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Prasad S/O Suresh Prasad @ Suresh R/O Village - Jangal, Naugava, P.S- Bishunpura, District - Kushinagar, State- Uttar Pradesh ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Punita Kumari D/O Ram Dayal Ram R/O Vill.- Tamkuha, P.S- Dhanaha, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable u/s 137(2), 96 and 64 of the B.N.S. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. Pursuant to the order dated 02.07.2025, the Opposite Party no. 2 along with her father Ram Dayal, is physically present in Chambers and has stated that O.P. No. 2 is staying at her in-laws house and is happy with the conduct of the in-laws. She has also stated that she does not have any issues if the petitioner is released on bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5004 of 2025(7) dt.09-07-2025 2/3

4. The learned counsel for the parties has also stated that O.P. No. 2 has personally, as well as through her father, communicated that she does not have any issues staying with her in-laws. She is more than happy about the release of the petitioner and has stated that she would be residing with him in the future also.

5. On the query made by the court with regard to the settlement arrived at between the parties they have jointly stated that O.P. No. 2 and her in-laws are living happily together, they do not have any issues from any corner and O.P. No. 2 ready to reside with the petitioner for their life.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the fact that the petitioner had married the O.P. No. 2, which is not disputed by the O.P. No. 2 and the fact that she is staying in her in-laws house, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/concerned court, in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 subject to the following conditions : a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

b The petitioner shall remain physically present in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5004 of 2025(7) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 Court on each date of the trial.

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Prakash/- U