Nikhil Kumar @ Nikhil Raj Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 06-02-2026

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115, 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 as well as Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his minor son disclosed that he had gone to attend the call of nature when Niraj Kumar came and snatched keys of his bike and dragged him towards the PACS godown and thereafter called his friends Kanhaiya Kumar Pathak, Kundan Kumar and petitioner and thereafter made him naked and

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56214 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026 2/3

¶17

assaulted. Further, Niraj Kumar indulged in unnatural sex with the victim and also inserted bamboo in his private part and the other accused videographed the occurrence.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then thrust of the allegation is against Niraj Kumar. It is next submitted that petitioner is in custody since 19.03.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted. It is also submitted that Niraj Kumar had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No.69923 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 09.01.2026, passed by a learned Coordinate Bench. It is thus, submitted that the case of the petitioner is on a better footing. It is further submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.

¶19

Learned APP opposes the bail application.

¶20

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56214 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026 3/3

¶22

satisfaction of learned 6^th District & Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge POCSO, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No.253 of 2024.

¶23

However, it is made clear that if the learned Trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after his release, is trying to delay the framing of charge, or after framing of charge, is trying to delay the trial, in both the conditions, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

¶24

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶25

Sanjay/-

¶26

U T

Nikhil Kumar @ Nikhil Raj v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikhil Kumar @ Nikhil Raj 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

Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Yadav @ Dhananjay Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Babulal Mahto @ Babulal Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Kumar Singh Vs Sri Dipak Kumar Singh, The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary

Amrita Kumari Vs The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department

Lalu Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

S.K. Ekbal @ Md. Munirul Haque @ Shekh Ekbal Khan @ Shekh Ekbal @ Md. Munieul Haque Vs The State of Bihar