Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Patel v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89699 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Patel S/o Raj Patel @ Raj Kumar Prasad @ Raju Patel Resident of vill- Dhobani, ward no. 1, P.S- Mainatand, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
XXX D/o Y R/o village - Dhobani, ward no. 1, P.S.- Mainatand, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajdeep Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and leaned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 75(2), 78, 79, 351(1), 127(1), 115(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R. is that petitioner along with co-accused persons abused the informant in filthy language and tried to take her to forest but she somehow managed to escape.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89699 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 2/2 the F.I.R. was lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay of 12 days as the occurrence is said to have taken place on 13.07.2025, whereas the present F.I.R. was lodged on 22.07.2025 after due thought and deliberation. Allegation against petitioner is general and omnibus and there is no specific accusation of any overt act against him. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioner and submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) khushbu/- U T