Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86122 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2025 Thana- DARAUNDA District- Siwan ====================================================== Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar Ram S/O Dharmendra Ram R/O VillageMarasara (Madasara), P.S- Daraunda, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
X W/O Supendra Ram R/O Village- Marsara, P.S- Daraunda, Distt.- Siwan. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-03-2026 Despite valid service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2.
2. Heard Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 28.05.2025 in connection with Daraunda P.S. Case No. 253 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 27.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 70(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
4. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that on 26.05.2025 at 5.00 PM, when the informant went outside her house for work and her daughter was alone at home, then taking
2/4 advantage of the situation, petitioner along with other coaccused persons entered her house and forcefully committed rape upon her daughter.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is false and fabricated and petitioner is brother-in-law of the victim. It is next submitted that sister of the victim and the petitioner got married on 25.05.2025 without will of the parents of the victim and in order to falsely implicated the petitioner, the present case is lodged by the mother of the victim. Although victim has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under section 180 and 183 of BNSS but it appears from the FIR that date of the occurrence was on 26.05.2026 but the FIR was lodge on2 7.05.2025 i.e. on the next day of the alleged occurrence and apart from that medical report of the victim does not support the allegations in the FIR. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
3/4 submits that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the said matter.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special judge, Exclusive Court, POCSO, Siwan in connection with Daraunda P.S. Case No. 253 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
4/4 criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T