Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23659/2026rejected

Pravind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-08Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23659 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2025 Thana- KACCHWA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Pravind Kumar Son of Sudama Singh R/o Village - Ibrahimpur, P.S. - Kachhwan, Distt. - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

XXXX Son of Sudama Singh R/o Village - Saraiyan, P.S. - Kachhwan, Distt. - Rohtas.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 05.01.2026, in connection with Kachhawan P.S. Case No. 192 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 23.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 351(2), 3(5)of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has established physical relation with the victim on several occasion on the pretext of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23659 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 2/3 the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. As per allegation in the F.I.R. that the petitioner has established physical relation with the victim on several occasion on the pretext of marriage. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and in fact the informant has not informed her parents about the occurrence and she has informed the parent of the petition about the present occurrence.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Sections 180/183 of the B.N.S.S. in which she has fully supported the case of the prosecution and apart from that the age of the victim was 15 years which suggests that on the date of occurrence she was minor.

6. Considering the nature of allegation supported by the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180/ 183 of the B.N.S.S., I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Kachhawan P.S. Case No. 192 of 2025

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23659 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 3/3 pending in the Court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-VIIth-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Rohtas.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U