Allowed¶21

Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Paswan @ Prashant Kumar Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Dec 2025CR. MISC./52641/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court bail grant; CR. MISC. No.52641 of 2025; Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025, Saharsa; BNS Sections 126(2), 118(1), 74, 351(2); POCSO Act Sections 3 and 7; victim statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S.; victim P.W.1 did not identify petitioner; custody since 23.04.2025; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; A.D.J.-VI-cum-Special Judge POCSO Saharsa; decided 05-12-2025 by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Saharsa in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025. ¶21

Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Paswan @ Prashant… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52641 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa

¶3

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

¶4

Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Paswan @ Prashant Kumar Paswan, S/O Laddu Paswan Resident of Village- Badsam, P.S- Saurbazar, District- Saharsa, Bihar.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Soni Devi, W/O Mohan Paswan, R/O Village- Badsam, P.S- Saur Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa, Bihar.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gulnar Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 05-12-2025

¶11

Heard Mr. Amarnath Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gulnar Begum, learned APP for the State.

¶12

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 74, 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 7 of the POCSO Act.

¶13

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner took the minor daughter of the informant at a dark place on pistol point and made a video biting the cheek and also attempted to misbehave with her. When the daughter of the informant raised alarm, she was being threatened of dire consequences. It is further alleged that the video was made viral

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52641 of 2025(4) dt.05-12-2025 2/3

¶15

on the facebook.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It has further been submitted during trial, the victim of this case has been examined as P.W.1 and in her examination-inchief, she has stated that this case has been filed by her mother. When she has gone in a marriage party and when she was returning form there, three boys came there and pushed her. She does not identify those boys. She has further stated that her mother and other girls were there who were returning with her. She does not know the names of her friends who were with her. She has further stated that police has not taken her statement and she has identified her statement given under 183 of the B.N.S.S. It has also been submitted that from perusal of the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. it is clear that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he has clicked the photo giving bite in left cheek of the minor daughter of the informant and that photo has been made viral. It has also been submitted that during trial the victim herself has not identified the petitioner. Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52641 of 2025(4) dt.05-12-2025 3/3

¶18

23.04.2025.

¶19

Learned APP appearing for the State has

¶20

vehemently opposed the application for bail.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Saharsa in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025.

¶22

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

lata/- U T

Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Paswan @ Prashant Kumar Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Paswan @ Prashant Kumar Paswan 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

Ram Kinkar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shahabuddin Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Chaudhary @ Krishna Kant Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Sujeet Kumar Paswan @ Sujeet Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Paswan @ Sujit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar