Vinod Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28127 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Vinod Yadav S/O Late Thakur Yadav R/O Vill.- Kuroom Tola, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Victim X W/O YYY R/O Vill.- Kuroom Tola, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Gulnar Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2026 Heard Mr. Raghav Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Gulnar Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 13.06.2024 in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 259 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 12.06.2024 for the offences punishable under Section 376(AB) of the Indian Penal Code and 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner committed rape of his own daughter who is 9 years of age.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28127 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 2/2 implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the FIR that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has committed rape upon his own 9 years old daughter and the medical report of the victim also confirms the same.

6. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR supported by the medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Suguali P.S. Case No. 259 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Exclusive Special Judge (Rape and POCSO Cases), East Champaran, Motihari.

7. Prayer is refused.

8. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T