Dismissed¶20

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish Das v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Jan 2026CR. MISC./37278/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish Das; regular bail rejected; Laukaha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024; G.R. No. 97 of 2024; Madhubani; IPC Sections 366A, 363, 354(B), 354(D); POCSO Sections 8, 12; minor victim; photographs circulated; forcible taking away; Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement vs Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement; medical age 16-17 years; trial near conclusion; CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37278 of 2025; decided 05-01-2026; Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey.

What did the court decide?

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges for bail, and his prayer for regular bail is rejected. ¶20

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish Das Vs The State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37278 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2024 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish Das son of Tej Narayan Das Village -Bhajnaha PS- Laukaha District -Madhubani

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar bihar

¶8

Manish Kumar Sah son of Dorik Lal Sah Village -Bhajnaha PS- Laukaha District -Madhubani

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Prakash, Adv. For the State : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well

¶13

as learned APP for the State.

¶14

In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail

¶15

in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024, G.R. No. 97 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 363, 354(B),(D) of the IPC and 8, 12 of POCSO Act.

¶16

As per the FIR, the informant’s minor daughter was being harassed for the past six months by co-villager Ram Ashish Das (the petitioner), who circulated her photographs. Further, the petitioner along with some unknown persons, forcibly took her away from her house.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37278 of 2025(4) dt.05-01-2026 2/2

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., did not support the prosecution case. He has submitted further that the age of the victim, as per the medical report, is 16-17 years and there is no allegation of commission of rape against the petitioner.

¶19

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., has fully supported the prosecution case. He has also submitted that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined and the trial is on the verge of its conclusion.

¶20

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner doesn’t deserve the privileges for bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

¶21

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶22

kundan/-

¶23

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish Das v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Ashish Das @ Ramshish 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

Mukesh Paswan @ Mukesh Kumar @ Lutna Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Pukar Sah @ Rampukar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Gopal Yadav @ Gopal Singh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Kush Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Pawan Kumar Purve @ Pawan Kumar Purvey Vs The State of Bihar