Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.701 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-484 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Rahul Kumar S/o- Bhagwat Singh R/o village - Saray Baksh , p.s.- Bheldi , District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Amisha Kumari D/o- Sikandar Prasad Village- Lerua Takht Ps- Madhaurah Dist- Saran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Madhaurah P.S. Case No. 484 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 4/6 POCSO Act and Section 67 (C) of IT Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, the petitioner committed rape upon the informant, made video of the same and it went viral.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.701 of 2025(5) dt.05-05-2025 2/2 also submits that there is delay of one month in lodging the FIR. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. There was love affair between the petitioner and the victim girl. It is further submitted that the victim girl is major and she on her own will went with the petitioner for a tour. The petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2024 and has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the informant. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS has supported the prosecution case. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T