Babi Devi @ Bebi Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56389 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2024 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Baby Kumar @ Babby Rajak @ Boby Kumar S/o Briju Rajak @ Biraju Baitha R/o Village- Gorigama, P.S. Mahnar, District- Vaishali 2.
Sunny Kumar@Sunny Kumar Rajak S/o Briju Rajak @ Biraju Baitha R/o Village- Gorigama, P.S. Mahnar, District- Vaishali 3.
Rajan Kumar @ Rajan Kumar Rajak S/o Dilip Baitha @ Dilip Rajak R/o Village- Gorigama, P.S. Mahnar, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Advocate General office, Bihar, Patna 2.
Anita Devi W/O- Jai Shankar Prasad, R/O vill- Gorigama, PS- Mahnar, distvaishali ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Javed Aslam, Advocate For the Opposite Party State:
Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 07-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioners are named in the FIR and apprehending their arrest in connection with Mahnar P.S. Case No.129 of 2024 registered under Sections 366(A), 376, 511/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.') and Section 8, 12 POCSO Act.
3. The allegations against the petitioners is to help the main co-accused Pinkesh Kumar and they also made an attempt to outrage the minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years. The occurrence alleged to be taken place at Chakla Shahi.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56389 of 2025(3) dt.07-11-2025 2/3 The members of the petitioners' family are also alleged to be involved in the occurrence.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the present implications took place out of certain neighbourhood dispute and differences, which now appears to have been compromised and thereafter a compromise petition was preferred by the informant before the learned Special Court itself, retracting the earlier version of the allegations. It is submitted that even as per the FIR, the thrust of allegation is available against Pinkesh Kumar and not against these petitioners. Petitioners are said to be men of clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP has opposed the prayer of bail.
6. Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the informant also approves the factum of compromise as submitted aforesaid.
7. Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of the fact as allegations as per the FIR is mainly available against co-accused Pinkesh Kumar, who is not the petitioner for the present coupled with the fact that the issues and differences out of which the present implications was raised also appears compromised, accordingly, the petitioners, abovenamed, who are men of clean antecedents, are directed to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56389 of 2025(3) dt.07-11-2025 3/3 released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIth-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Vaishali, Hajipur, in connection with Mahnar P.S. Case No.129/2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Pawan/- U T