Ravindra Mahto @ Bhanu Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14479 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran

====================================================== Ravindra Mahto @ Bhanu Mahto, Son of Aklu Mahto @ Akul Mahto, Resident of Village-Sagar Churaman, Police Station-Kesariya, District-East Champaran.

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

Ritu Devi, Wife of Manoj Sah, Resident of village-Bathna Pipra Kothi, P.S.Pipra Kothi, Dist- East Champaran.

¶8

Rinku Kumari, Daughter of Manoj Sah, Resident of village-Bathna Pipra Kothi, P.S.- Pipra Kothi, Dist- East Champaran

¶9

... ... Opposite Parties

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha-1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

6 07-08-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection

¶14

with Pipra Kothi P.S. Case No.145 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(3), 96, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘B.N.S.’).

¶15

The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and

¶16

is in custody since 07.09.2024.

¶17

Allegation against the petitioner is to commit

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14479 of 2025(6) dt.07-08-2025 2/4

¶19

penetrative sexual assault/rape upon the minor daughter of informant aged about 16 years.

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

¶21

the petitioner that after recovery, the statement of victim was recorded under Section 183 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’), where she categorically stated that she went Bengaluru with one Deva, where she came in contact with this petitioner and she herself offered to petitioner for marriage and, thereafter, on acceptance, the marriage solemnized between them. It is submitted that from the statement of victim, the allegation of kidnapping and sexual assault prima facie not appears convincing and moreover nothing incriminating appears upon medical examination of victim in support of penetrative sexual assault/rape, wherein the victim also found between the age group of 17-19 years, making allegation under POCSO Act questionable. While concluding argument, it is submitted that even the victim could not examined in view of Section 35(1) of the POCSO Act suggesting prima facie that trial of this case is not likely to conclude within the time prescribed in view of

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14479 of 2025(6) dt.07-08-2025 3/4

¶23

Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act. The petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

¶24

Learned APP opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. None appeared on behalf of informant despite of service of notice.

¶25

In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as victim completely negate allegation of kidnapping and rape/penetrative sexual assault qua petitioner through her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, coupled with the fact that not even a single witness was examined during trial despite of the fact that petitioner remains in custody since 07.09.2024, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 6^th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Pipra Kothi P.S. Case No.145 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘CrPC’)/under Section 480(3) of

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14479 of 2025(6) dt.07-08-2025 4/4

¶27

the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’).

¶28

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶29

Sanjeet/-

¶30

U T

Ravindra Mahto @ Bhanu Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Mahto @ Bhanu Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhim Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Israil @ Md. Israil Nadaf @ Md. Ishrail Mansuri Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Sah @ Raja Kumar@ Raja Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar