Deep Kumar v. The State of Bihar Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
therefore, this application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3, 5, 61, 64, 127(6), 140(4), 143(e), 145, 351(2), 352
- ITP Act, 1956 ss. 3, 4, 5, 6
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ss. 4, 6
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 183
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions, prima- facie, nothing incriminating appears against petitioner and therefore, this application is allowed.
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh Mr.Sadanand Paswan ORAL ORDER 2 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 127(6), 140(4), 143(e), 145, 64, 61, 352, 351(2) and 3/5 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the ITP Act 1956, Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i), (ii) and 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (POA) Act.
The petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2026.
The allegation against the petitioner and others is that they are involved in immoral trafficking and when a raid was conducted in red light area of Khuskibagh Purnea, 11 minor victims were recovered/rescued.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that implication of petitioner with the present case is merely on the basis of suspicion as petitioner is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21983 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 resident of nearby locality and was completely unaware about the activities, which were running over there. He further submits that none of the victim made their statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, suggesting any incrimination against petitioner, which may suggest involvement of petitioner with the present crime in question. It is submitted that there is nothing on record or surfaced during the course of investigation, which may suggest that alleged activities are out of atrocities as defined within the meaning of SC/ST Act, 1989.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the application of the petitioner.
Operative part
In view of the aforesaid factual submissions, prima- facie, nothing incriminating appears against petitioner and therefore, this application is allowed.
Let the petitioner, above named petitioner, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court below. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: therefore, this application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 3, 5, 61, 64, 127(6), 140(4), 143(e), 145, 351(2), 352; ITP Act, 1956 — ss. 3, 4, 5, 6; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss. 4, 6; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.