Subham Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45365 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Subham Kumar S/o Anil Rajbanshi @ Anil Rajwanshi R/o Village- Targir, P.S.- Govindpur, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Saneha Kumari D/o Prem Ram R/o Village- Gagri, P.S.- Govindpur, DistrictNawada ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 Heard Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025 for the offence punishable under sections 64 of the BNS and 8, 12 of the POCSO Act lodged on 16.04.2025 by the informant, Sneha Kumari.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the victim girl was in conversation with the petitioner and allegation is that on one fine morning, he forcibly established physical relationship. The informant raised alarm whereafter, he escaped. This led to the FIR.
4. In this case, notice was issued to the opposite party
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45365 of 2025(5) dt.15-11-2025 2/3 no. 2, the name of Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma appears in the cause list but on call, there is no appearance.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is only twenty one years of age, the girl was on the verge of becoming major, they were in relationship, only to put pressure, the present FIR.
6. The Co-ordinate Bench had called for the case diary and the statement of the victim girl which are on record according to which, the victim girl narrated that they were in relationship, used to meet each other in the agricultural land, the villagers caught them whereafter, the mother lodged the FIR. She wants only to marry the petitioner and nothing else.
7. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the record shows that she was not major.
8. Taking into account the submissions of the parties as also the statement of the victim girl coupled with the fact that the petitioner is only twenty one years of age, is in custody since 17.04.2025, FIR is there, he shall be facing the music, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45365 of 2025(5) dt.15-11-2025 3/3 of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Nawada in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T