Patna High Court – Orders
Sunil Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Bihar on 20 August, 2025
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21955 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2024 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Sunil Kumar Thakur Son of Bhupendra Thakur Resident of Village
-Hathiyondha, Ward No 3, PS -Bihariganj, Dist- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rinku Kumari Daughter of Late Bechan Das village- Gopalpur, ps-
Udakishunganj, Dist- Madhepura
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar No.6, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Arinjay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-08-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024 registered
for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 354, 376(1),
366, 366(a), 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of
the POCSO Act.
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner giving
inducement of marriage and better life to the minor daughter of
the informant, established physical relationship with her and
made videograph clip. The petitioner continued his nefarious
activities and committed rape with the daughter of the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21955 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025
2/5
on a number of occasions. A Panchayati was also held but the
petitioner did not refrain from his activities.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. The FIR has been registered on the basis of complaint
petition of the complainant/informant and the date of occurrence
is stated to be 05.07.2022 but the complaint was filed on
06.12.2023 and there is no satisfactory explanation for the same.
The FIR was lodged on 30.06.2024. These facts go on to show
that the allegation against the petitioner has been made as
afterthought. Learned counsel further submits that the
informant, before the witnesses, made a statement which was
recorded on a non-judicial stamp paper of Rs.100/-, that there
had been monetary dispute between the petitioner and the
informant and at the instance of one Santosh Singh, she had
made the allegation against the petitioner and in future she
would not make any such allegation. Learned counsel further
submits that even in the complaint petition, first date of
occurrence has not been mentioned and it is not believable that
the occurrence continued for two years but the informant never
approached the police or the court of law. Moreover, although
the FIR was lodged on 30.06.2024, the statement of the victim
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21955 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025
3/5
girl was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 19.07.2024 and
at that time, the victim refused to get her statement recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and her statement under Section 164
Cr.P.C. was recorded on 04.10.2024. The victim refused to
undergo medical examination. These facts show that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this concocted case by
the informant who is in habit of lodging such cases. Earlier the
same informant lodged a complaint case on 06.08.2022 against
one Nawal Kishore Jaiswal and consequent thereto Bihariganj
P.S. Case No. 301 of 2022 was registered under Sections
370(A), 376, 354(B), 406 of IPC, but the informant
compromised the said case after getting money. Learned counsel
reiterates that the informant is in habit of lodging such cases in
order to extort money from the persons. The petitioner is in
custody since 18.10.2024 and charge-sheet has been submitted.
The petitioner is having clean antecedent.
05. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant oppose the submission made on behalf
of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that
due to pressure of the petitioner and other members of the
society, the informant could not lodge the case earlier. Learned
counsel further submits that it is clear from the FIR itself that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21955 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025
4/5
the daughter of the informant was minor and they are poor
persons. There is specific allegation against the petitioner that
he committed rape on a number of times with the minor
daughter of the informant and therefore, the petitioner does not
deserve bail.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
doubtful nature of allegation against the petitioner and further
considering the period of custody of the petitioner and his clean
antecedent along with submission of charge-sheet, the petitioner
above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act),
Madhepura/court concerned in connection with Bihariganj P.S.
Case No. 218 of 2024, subject to the conditions mentioned in
Section 480(3) of BNSS and the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of
the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21955 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025
5/5or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioner will be liable to be
cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T