Dismissed¶19

Aditya Tiwari @ Raju Tiwari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Apr 2026CR. MISC./89197/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected - Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 89197 of 2025, decided 21-04-2026 by Sandeep Kumar, J. Petitioner Aditya Tiwari @ Raju Tiwari; FIR Kateya P.S. Case No. 529/2025, District Gopalganj; offences under Sections 64, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act; allegations of making informant habitual of drugs, sexual exploitation as sex slave, recording intimate moments; bail refused on gravity of offence and statement of victim girl over opposition of learned APP; petitioner claimed no criminal antecedent and custody since 22.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused: considering the gravity of the offence and the statement of the victim girl, the Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. ¶18

Aditya Tiwari @ Raju Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89197 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-529 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Aditya Tiwari @ Raju Tiwari S/O Pramod Tiwari R/O Village- Sabeya Kutti, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

XXX W/O Nand Kishore Ojha R/O Village- Gaora, P.S- Kateya, Distt.Gopalganj.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Javed Aslam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 21-04-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 529/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶14

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner and others are said to have made the informant habitual of taking drugs and thereafter subjected her to sexual exploitation by treating her as sex slave. It is further alleged that they were using her for sexual acts with different persons and had also recorded her intimate moments.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89197 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026 2/2

¶16

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. Learned counsel further submits that he has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 22.09.2025. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.

¶17

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶18

6. Considering the gravity of the offence and the statement of the victim girl, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶19

7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

¶20

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶21

tusharika/-

¶22

U T