Pyare Lal Bosak v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45977 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2025 Thana- BALIA BELON District- Katihar ====================================================== Pyare Lal Bosak S/o Late Sukdev Bosak @ Paltu Bosak @ Pultu Bosak Resident of Village- Shikarpur Ahmandpur, PS- Balia Belon, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Bihar 2.
Ganesh Kumar Sah S/o Rajendra Prasad Sah R/o vill - Shikarpur (Pachayat Hat), P.S. - Balia Belon, Distt - Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Bimal Kumar, Adv.
For the State :
Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP For OP No. 2 :
Mr.Sanjeev Kr. Singh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Balia Belon P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 65(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 89, 3(5) of BNS and Section 4/8 of POCSO Act.
3. The petitioner is tutor of the victim, who is aged about 15 years. According to the allegation, the petitioner, after duping the victim in love and affection, committed rape for multiple times. She became pregnant which was aborted by the petitioner by administering medicine.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45977 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The victim had written several letters to the petitioner which shows that there was love and affection between the petitioner and the victim. It has further been submitted that FIR was lodged after six days and according to the medical report, no sign of pregnancy was detected.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner, being the tutor, committed rape for multiple times with a minor girl, aged about 15 years.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner doesn't deserve the privileges for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T