Dismissed¶22

Saryug Das v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 May 2025CR. MISC./7979/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejection; rape of minor girl; POCSO Act Ss.4/6; IPC Ss.341, 323, 376(3), 504, 506 r/w S.34; SC/ST Act Ss.3(2)(v), 3(w)(i); victim's S.161 and S.164 Cr.P.C. statements support prosecution; medical report - no sign of physical assault but rape cannot be ruled out; petitioner in custody since 21.01.2024; charge-sheet filed; trial directed to conclude at earliest; Raghopur P.S., Supaul; Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7979 of 2025; decided 06-05-2025; Justice Chandra Prakash Singh.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the specific and heinous nature of the offence against the petitioner, the court is not inclined to grant regular bail and the bail application is rejected. ¶22

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7979 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul

¶3

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

¶4

Saryug Das Son of Late Kari Das R/O Ward no 13,Bhagta Tola, Daulatpur,P.S.-Raghopur, District - Supaul

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Sunita Devi Wife of Shatrudhan Sharma R/O Ward no 13,Bhagta Tola, Daulatpur,P.S.-Raghopur, District - Supaul

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun . For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 06-05-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2024 dated 20.01.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376(3), 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4/6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(w)(i) of SC/ST Act.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, the informant alleges that on 19.01.2024 at about 01:00 P.M., his daughter had gone to mow grass and returned to home in tears and told her mother that Saryug Das (petitioner) allured her of providing Chocolate,

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7979 of 2025(3) dt.06-05-2025 2/3

¶17

grabbed her mouth, carried her inside the maize field, thrasshed her down and thereafter committed rape on her. When the victim shouted for help, the villagers reached there, the petitioner fled away from the spot. When they went to the house of the petitioner, he was found absconded. The family members of the petitioner started abusing and threatened her of dire consequences.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no eye-witness of the alleged occurrence. The charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that as per the medical report, there is no sign of any physical assault found over the body of the victim. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 21.01.2024.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the victim is a minor girl. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., has supported the prosecution case and stated that the petitioner has allured her of providing chocolate, thrashed her down in the maize-crop

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7979 of 2025(3) dt.06-05-2025 3/3

¶21

field and forcibly committed raper on her. As per the medical report of the victim, it is mentioned that no suggestive sign or any sign of physical assault was found but rape cannot be ruled out.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of offence against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, Supaul.

¶23

Learned court below is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner at the earliest.

¶24

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶25

shivam/-

¶26

U T

Saryug Das v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saryug Das v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Kumar Sahni @ Ravi Kumar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Nirmal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajkapoor @ Rajkapoor Kushawaha @ Raj Kapoor Vs The State of Bihar

Damodar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Pravesh Ray @ Nirala @ Ram Pravesh Nirala Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar