Dismissed¶22

Omprakash Baitha @ Om Prakash Baitha v. The State of Bihar

Bail – Regular bail

Patna HC3 Feb 2026CR. MISC./59642/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.59642 of 2025, decided 03-02-2026 by Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J. Regular bail rejected in Sahodara P.S. Case No. 98 of 2024 (West Champaran) for offences under Sections 65(2), 123, 3(5) BNS and Section 4 POCSO Act; allegation of rape on a seven-year-old minor, blood-soaked garments sent for FSL; defence of false implication after liquor consumption and altercation; custody since 14.11.2024. Keywords: bail rejection, POCSO, BNS 65(2), rape of minor, FSL.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner does not deserve the privileges of bail and his prayer for regular bail is rejected. ¶22

Omprakash Baitha @ Om Prakash Baitha Vs The… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59642 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2024 Thana- SAHODARA District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Omprakash Baitha @ Om Prakash Baitha S/o Madan Baitha R/o Purani Bazar, Ward No. 09, P.O.- Narkatiaganj, P.S.- Shikarpur, District- West Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

X W/o Y R/o Devi Asthan, Ward No.14, P.O.- Narkatiaganj, P.S.- Shikarpur, District- West Champaran

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manaur Alam, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 03-02-2026

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Sahodara P.S. Case No. 98 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 65(2), 123, 3(5) of the BNS and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶17

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner with the assistance of the other co-accused, committed rape on the minor daughter of the informant. Further allegation is against coaccused Satyendra Paswan that he administered intoxicated substance to the informant’s husband.

¶18

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59642 of 2025(3) dt.03-02-2026 2/2

¶20

that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that the father of the victim and the petitioner were co-passengers. The father of the victim, the petitioner and other co-accused persons consumed liquor, and due to some altercation, the petitioner has falsely been implicated. The petitioner has been in custody since 14.11.2024.

¶21

On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner sexually ravished a minor child of seven years and her garments, soaked with blood, were recovered and sent for FSL examination.

¶22

In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges of bail, which is hereby rejected .

¶23

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶24

Nirmal/- U T

Omprakash Baitha @ Om Prakash Baitha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omprakash Baitha @ Om Prakash Baitha 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

Nikhil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Majhar Alam @ Majahar Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Samphul Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar @ Sanjiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sindhu Kumari @ Gola Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar