Dismissed¶21

Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Nov 2025CR. MISC./23589/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; Patna High Court; CR. MISC. No.23589 of 2025; decided 12-11-2025; Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J; Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar; Sarita Kumari (informant); State of Bihar; Mahila PS Case No. 100 of 2024, Darbhanga; Section 376 IPC; Sections 4 and 6 POCSO Act; Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.; minor victim aged about 14 years; pregnancy; pretext of marriage; absconder; process issued.

What did the court decide?

In view of the facts and circumstances (alleged sexual exploitation of a minor victim on the pretext of marriage, her pregnancy, and issuance of process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.), the petitioner does not deserve the privileges of anticipatory bail; the prayer is rejected. ¶21

Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar Vs The State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23589 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar S/O Kailash Yadav R/O Vill.- Piprahi, P.S.- Tilkeshwar, Dist.- Darbhanga

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Sarita Kumari D/O Late Bhuttu Yadav R/O Vill.- Gadhepura, P.S.Tilkeshwar, Dist.- Darbhanga

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Tabish Sharfuddin For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

7 12-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶14

learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶16

As per allegation, the petitioner sexually exploited the victim at the pretext of marriage. Subsequently, the victim became pregnant, and the petitioner absconded, leaving her.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. As a matter of fact, the victim and the petitioner developed

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23589 of 2025(7) dt.12-11-2025 2/2

¶19

physical relationship with their own sweet will.

¶20

On the other hand, the learned APP for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is aged about 14 years. The petitioner exploited her sexually and she became pregnant. Moreover, the process under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued.

¶21

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner doesn’t deserve the privileges for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

¶22

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

kundan/-

Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Babu Yadav @ Raja Babu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Raushan Kumar @ Ravi Raushan Vs The State of Bihar

Sumit Kumar @ Sumit Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Jaiswal @ Tinku Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar

Rajendra Chaudhari @ Rajendra Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ravindar Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Keshav Raj Vs The State of Bihar