Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6384 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2024 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran

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

Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Yadav, son of Birendra Rai, Resident of village - Kasba Tola Jitaura, P.S.- Madhuban, Dist- East Champaran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Dina Sah, son of Bihari Sah, resident of village-Kasba Tola, Jitaura, P.S.Madhuban, Dist- East Champaran

¶9

... ... Opposite Parties

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate For the State : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP For the Informant : Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, Advocate ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 19-08-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly assisted by

¶15

learned counsel appearing for the informant/O.P. No.2.

¶16

The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection

¶17

with Madhuban P.S. Case No.214 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) aand section 8 of the Protection of the Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short ‘POCSO Act’).

¶18

The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and is

¶19

in custody since 03.08.2024.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6384 of 2025(4) dt.19-08-2025 2/4

¶21

Allegation against the petitioner is to kidnap the minor daughter of informant aged about 17 years for the purpose of illicit intercourse/marriage with another person.

¶22

It is submitted by Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that during investigation the statement of victim after her recovery was recorded under Section 183 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’), where she completely negate the allegation of kidnapping and penetrative sexual assault/rape against petitioner rather she stated that she on her own sweet will left her home and solemnized marriage with petitioner. It is further pointed that petitioner remains in custody since 03.08.2024 i.e. more than one year and not even a single prosecution witness was examined by the learned trial court. In this context, it is submitted that even victim could not examined in view of Section 35(1) of the POCSO Act till date and, therefore, the conclusion of trial of this case is a remote

¶23

aspect and same is not likely to conclude within preferred timeline of one year in view of Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6384 of 2025(4) dt.19-08-2025 3/4

¶25

Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel appearing for the informant while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the petitioner was actively involved in the occurrence but, he could not disputed the factual aspects, as submitted above.

¶26

In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as victim after recovery completely negate the allegation of kidnapping and sexual assault, coupled with the fact that despite of remaining in custody for more than one year even victim of this case could not examined by the trial court, suggesting prima facie that trial of this case is not likely to conclude within prescribed timeline of one year in view of Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 7^th District and Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, POCSO Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No.214 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6384 of 2025(4) dt.19-08-2025 4/4

¶28

Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘CrPC’)/under Section

¶29

480(3) of the BNSS.

¶30

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶31

Sanjeet/-

¶32

U T

Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Yadav 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

Rohit Verma @ Sonu Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar @ Vicky Vs The State of Bihar

Govinda Kumar @ Gobinda Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Chandra Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Sikendra Pal Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar