Allowed¶25

Vicky Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Feb 2025CR. MISC./6158/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Vicky Kumar; regular bail; Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021; Sitamarhi; kidnapping of minor girl; Sections 363, 366(A), 380, 34 IPC; Section 8 POCSO Act; not named in FIR; custody since 24.11.2024; Section 164 Cr.P.C. victim statement; charge-sheet submitted; co-accused anticipatory bail via Cr. Misc. No. 2622 of 2022 (02.08.2022); bail bond Rs. 10,000; Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.; Section 480(3) BNSS; CR. MISC. No.6158 of 2025; Chandra Shekhar Jha.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge VI cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi/concerned court, subject to conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of the BNSS. ¶25

Vicky Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Vicky Kumar, arrested in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021 (Sections 363, 366(A), 380, 34 IPC; Section 8 POCSO Act) and in custody since 24.11.2024, should be released on regular bail.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The court's stated basis: save and except suspicion arising out of the petitioner's friendship with main accused Rahul, the victim, prima facie, failed to allege the petitioner in specific terms after recovery; together with custody since 24.11.2024, this supported release on bail.

¶25

Key takeaways

Petitioner directed to be released on bail in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge VI cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi/concerned court, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) BNSS.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.6158 of 2025, decided 07-02-2025 (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) — Allowed: regular bail granted to Vicky Kumar (not named in the F.I.R.; custody since 24.11.2024) in Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021, Sitamarhi, registered under Sections 363, 366(A), 380 and 34 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act. Allegation: kidnap of the informant's minor daughter alongwith co-accused persons/family members for purpose of illicit intercourse/marriage and loot of cash Rs. 20,00,000/- from the informant's house. Basis for bail: save and except suspicion arising out of the petitioner's friendship with main accused Rahul, the victim, prima facie, failed to allege the petitioner in specific terms after recovery. Bail bond Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each before the Additional Sessions Judge VI cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi, subject to Section 437(3) Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) BNSS conditions.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6158 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2021 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi

¶3

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

¶4

Vicky Kumar Son of Dinesh Rai Resident of village- Sukki Musharniya PSParihar District- Sitamarahi

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Upendra Thakur son of Late Rajendra Thakur Resident of village- Sukki Musharniya PS- Parihar District- Sitamarahi

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ayush Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 07-02-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶13

petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021 registered for the offences under Sections 363, 366(A), 380 and 34 of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶15

The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in

¶16

custody since 24.11.2024.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner is to kidnap

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6158 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 2/4

¶19

the minor daughter of the informant alongwith other coaccused persons/family members for the purpose of illicit intercourse/marriage. It is also alleged that cash of Rs. 20,00,000/- was looted by accused persons from the house of the informant during the course of occurrence.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that fact of this case suggests that minor daughter of the informant was in love affairs with one Rahul Kumar. The petitioner is a co-villager having close association with the family of said Rahul Kumar and for the said reason, he was implicated with the present case. It is further submitted that victim did not raise any overt act against this petitioner, while recording her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., rather she stated that petitioner was present as an accomplice of the main co-accused Rahul Kumar. In this context, it is pointed out that before recording the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. victim was with her parents and therefore the tutoring qua statement cannot be denied. It is pointed that several co-accused facing similar allegations have already granted anticipatory bail by learned co-ordinate

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6158 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 3/4

¶22

bench of this Court through Cr. Misc. No. 2622 of 2022 vide order dated 02.08.2022. While concluding the argument it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation has been completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶23

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, opposes the prayer for bail.

¶24

In view of the facts and circumstances as

¶25

mentioned above and by taking note of fact as save and except suspicion arising out of friendship with main accused Rahul, where prima-facie victim after recovery failed to alleged petitioner in specific terms, coupled with the fact that petitioner is in custody since 24.11.2024, accordingly, petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 144 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge VI cum Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi/concerned court, subject to the

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6158 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 4/4

¶27

conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of the BNSS.

¶28

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶29

S.Tripathi/-

¶30

U T

Vicky Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vicky Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Fuldeo Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Birendra Bashki Vs The State of Bihar

Pinku Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Patel @ Bhaiya Ji Vs The State of Bihar