Vidhyanand Kumar @ Tuntun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62214 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2025 Thana- ARWAL MAHILA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Vidhyanand Kumar @ Tuntun Kumar S/o Ramsinhasan Singh Resident Of Village- Abgila, Ps- Rampur, Chauram, Dist.- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
X X R/o vill - Abgila, P.S. - Rampur Chauram, Distt.- Arwal ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP For the Informant :
Mr. Suresh Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 41 of 2025 arising out of Arwal (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 65, 89, 115(2), 351(2) of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner forcibly established physical relationship with the informant and continued the abuse under threat of disclosure. When the victim became pregnant in December 2024, the petitioner forced her to consume medication that deteriorated her health.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It has also submitted that the victim has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62214 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026 2/3 examined as PW-1 and she did not support the prosecution case. She has stated that earlier, her statement was procured, which was not true. Except some quarrel (verbal abuse), nothing has taken place. It has further been submitted that mother of the victim has been examined as PW-2 during the trial and she also did not support the prosecution case. She, in paragraph-2 of her deposition, has stated that due to land dispute, she lodged this case against the petitioner. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent and is under custody since 08.03.2025.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant as well as State, opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above-named, is directed to furnish bail bond and on doing so, the court below shall release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J.-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Jehanabad in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 41 of 2025 arising out of Arwal (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025, subject to the following conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62214 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026 3/3
7. The petitioner shall physically appear before the learned Court below on each and every date. In case of failure on two consecutive dates, unless prevented by extremely adverse circumstances, learned Court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) priyanka/- U T