Ranjit Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82778 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ranjit Sahani S/O Shiv Shankar Sahani Resident of village-Pakari Barkhurdar, P.S. Rampurhari , Distt- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
X female 17 years as per FIR But truly 21 years, D/O Y Resident of villagePakari Barkhurdar, P.S. Rampurhari , Distt- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravi Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026 Heard Mr.Ravi Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 31.03.2025 in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.03.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),74,70(1),352,351(2),3/5 of BNS and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he caught hold the victim and dragged her towards orchard and committed rape with her for one hour and also molested her for three hours continuously.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82778 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Further submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the date of occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 15.03.2025, fardbeyan was recorded on 20.03.2025 but the present FIR has been instituted on 30.03.2025 after delay of 15 days without giving any explanation of delay.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Sections 180/183 of BNSS, 2023 in which she has fully supported the case of the prosecution, apart from that, the trial has begun and out of seven chargesheet witnesses, three witnesses have been examined.
6. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR which is supported by the victim and the information furnished by the informant that the trial has begun, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025 pending in the court of learned Special Judge Exclusive Special Court-III (Dealing with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82778 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026 3/3 Rape Cases and Cases under POCSO Act), Muzaffarpur.
7. Prayer is refused.
8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T