IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80244 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-349 Year-2025 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ======================================================

Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Son of surendra Prasad Yadav Resident Of Village- Badi Lagar Ps- Parbatta District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar bihar

2. Munchun Devi wife of Bablu Chuadhary Resident Of Village- Chakpryag, Ward no. 4, Ps- Parbatta, Dist- Khagaria ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

3 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 70 (2) of the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that one Sachin Kumar forcibly made the minor daughter of the informant sit on a bike took her to ‘bandh’ where six boys were allegedly present. It is further alleged that the victim was taken below the ‘bandh’ and was committed rape one by one. During the Course of investigation, the victim has given her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS which finds mention at paragraph-21 of the case diary. According to which, six accused persons committed rape with the minor daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case and that he has no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offence of rape. It is further submitted that upon a careful reading of the statement of the victim, even if the same is taken at its face value, no allegation of rape has been attributed to the present petitioner. It is further submitted that in the last part of the statement, the victim stated that she disclosed the occurrence to her mother whereafter her mother approached the ‘mukhiya’ (the present petitioner). It is alleged that the petitioner stated that if a case was lodged, it might create difficulties in the marriage of the victim and assured that the matter would be settled. She further alleged that she was also threatened with dire consequences. It is further submitted that, at best, the allegation against the present petitioner is limited to an alleged assurance of settlement and an alleged threat, and he is not among the accused persons, who are alleged to have committed rape upon the victim. Moreover, the petitioner has been languising in judicial custody since 17.09.2025.

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

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 349 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khagaria.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Jagdish/- U T