Allowed

Khobari Bin @ Ramashish Bin @ Ramashish Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC19 Nov 2025CR. MISC./56501/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted to the accused in a POCSO case after noting that over a year had passed since custody without examining any prosecution witness, constituting a prima facie defiance of Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act regarding the one-year trial timeline.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of similar amount.

Khobari Bin @ Ramashish Bin @ Ramashish Mukhiya… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56501 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2024 Thana- KANGLI District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Khobari Bin @ Ramashish Bin @ Ramashish Mukhiya S/o Late Vishwanath Mukhiya R/o Gaad, Gamhariya, P.s.- Kangali, Distt.- West Chamapran.

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

X S/o Jhaman Bin R/o Gaad, Gamhariya, P.S.- Kangali, Distt.- West Champaran.

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Upendra Kumar, APP

¶12

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

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

3 19-11-2025

¶16

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶17

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kangli P.S. Case No. 65/2024 corresponding to POCSO Case No. 201/2025 registered for the offence under Sections 65(1), 75, 351(2), 31(5) of BNS and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶18

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 10.10.2024.

¶19

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit penetrative sexual assault upon the informant aged about 16 years.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56501 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 2/4

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶22

the petitioner submitted that under the garb of physical assault, the present allegation of sexual assault was raised against the petitioner out of local disputes and differences. It is submitted that upon medical examination, nothing incriminating surfaced which may suggest that he was indulged in sexual activity, rather scratch mark over anterior chest and abrasion over back on right side was noticed, which also appears in contradiction to the statement of victim that she after biting petitioner fled away from place of occurrence as no biting mark was noticed upon medical examination. It is also submitted that nothing incriminating surfaced upon medical examination of victim also which may suggest that she was subjected to recent intercourse.

¶23

Arguing further, it is submitted by learned counsel that the petitioner is in custody since 10.10.2024 i.e. more than one year, where charge in this matter was framed on 21.05.2025 and, thereafter, not even a single prosecution

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56501 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 3/4

¶25

witness including victim was examined which is in complete defiance of the provision as available under Sections 35(1) and 35(2) of the POCSO Act. Explaining criminal antecedent, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

¶26

Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that allegation qua penetrative sexual assault is specifically available against this petitioner.

¶27

Upon perusal of record, it appears that notice as issued by this Court was received by brother of the informant, accordingly same deemed validly served upon the informant/opposite party no. 2.

¶28

Despite of service of notice, none turned up on behalf of the informant/opposite party no. 2 as to join the present proceedings.

¶29

Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as despite of custody of petitioner for more than one year i.e. since 10.10.2024 not even a single prosecution witness including victim could examine by learned

¶30

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56501 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 4/4

¶31

trial court, which completely appears in defiance of legal provisions as available under Section 35(1) of the POCSO Act, suggesting prima facie that trial of this case is not likely to conclude within preferred time line of one year as provisioned under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act, accordingly, petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Kangli P.S. Case No. 65/2024 corresponding to POCSO Case No. 201/2025, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge Rape & POCSO Act, West Champaran at Bettiah/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶32

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶33

veena/-

¶34

U T

Khobari Bin @ Ramashish Bin @ Ramashish Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khobari Bin @ Ramashish Bin @ Ramashish Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md Salman @ Md Salman Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Kaushal Kumar Das @ Kaushal Keshore Das Vs The State of Bihar

Abhay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Milan Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Kumar Jha @ Sanu Jha Vs The State of Bihar