Kamlesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP ======================================================

¶12

6 15-09-2025

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶14

petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dhaudadh P.S. Case No. 11 of 2025 registered for the offences under Section 65(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(i)(r)(w)(i)(ii) SC/ST Act.

¶16

The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 04.02.2025.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit penetrative sexual assault/rape upon minor daughter of the informant aged about nine years .

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that out of petty neighborhood disputes and differences, petitioner implicated with the present case. It is submitted that as per FIR informant projected himself as an eye-witness of the occurrence, whereas as per statement of victim as recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS it transpires that she came to her home

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24744 of 2025(6) dt.15-09-2025 2/3

¶20

and narrated entire occurrence to her elder sister. It is pointed out that the allegation of “bleeding from private part” was not supported by the informant being eye-witness, whereas same appears to be explained by victim herself, while recording her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS as just to aggravate allegation, whereas no such alleged bleeding was noticed upon medical examination also. It is also submitted that injuries on the cheeks of victim was also not found in terms of statement of victim. It is submitted that in view of such medical descriptions and further contradictions in FIR qua statement of victim as recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, occurrence itself appears questionable on its face.

¶21

While concluding the argument it is submitted that, petitioner remains in custody for about 8 months, it is also submitted that progress of trial suggest that same is not likely to conclude within the preferred time period of one year as available under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act. It is also submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation of this case has already completed, and as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶22

Learned Spl.PP appearing on behalf of the State, while opposing the prayer for bail submitted that allegation is

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24744 of 2025(6) dt.15-09-2025 3/3

¶24

specific against this petitioner as to commit sexual assault upon minor daughter of the informant. It is also submitted that information to informant regarding present pending proceeding already communicated in terms of order dated 31.07.2025.

¶25

Despite information as submitted aforesaid by Spl.PP

¶26

informant failed to join the present proceeding before this Court.

¶27

In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of contradictions as discussed aforesaid qua occurrence, coupled with the fact as petitioner remains in custody since 04.02.2025, accordingly above named petitioner, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Dhaudadh P.S. Case No. 11 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Exclusive Special Court POCSO Rohtas at Sasaran/concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.

¶28

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶29

S.Tripathi/- U T

Kamlesh Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Singh 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

Pankaj Shah @ Pankaj Sah @ Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anjani Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Mangra @ Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar @ Suraj Kumar @ Kargil Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Abhishek Satyarahi @ Chandan Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Singh Vs The Director Economic offence Unit, Bihar, Patna