Patna High Court – Orders
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Das vs The State Of Bihar on 16 July, 2026
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Sunil Dutta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.297 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-483 Year-2021 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Das, Son of Hari Das @ Hari Harijan R/V-
Shobhnathpur P.S- Kahalgaon, Dist- Bhagalpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1277 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-483 Year-2021 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Majnu Das Son of Bunel Das R/o Vill. - Shobnathpur, P.S. - Kahalgaon, Dist.
- Bhagalpur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ms. Z
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 297 of 2023)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Hansraj, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satya Narayan Prasad, Advocate
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1277 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bipin Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Geeta Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
3 16-07-2026
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 297 of 2023
Let the informant be added as Respondent No. 2 in
course of the day.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
2/7
2. It appears that in the connected matter, i.e. Cr.
Appeal (DB) No. 1277 of 2025 (Majnu Das Vs. The State of
Bihar), the informant has appeared and is represented by Mr.
Pramod Mishra, learned Advocate. Ms. Geeta Kumari,
learned A.C. to Mr. Pramod Mishra, learned Advocate is
present.
3. Issue notice to Respondent No. 2.
4. Ms. Geeta Kumari, learned Advocate waives
service of notice and accepts notice on behalf of Respondent
No. 2.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant shall serve copy
of the memorandum of appeal on the learned counsel for the
informant by tomorrow.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State as well as learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 may
file their written objection to the prayer for suspension of
sentence and bail of the appellant within two weeks from
tomorrow.
7. List this case on 15.07.2026, under the same
heading maintaining its position.
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1277 of 2025
8. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
3/7
counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
9. The appellant-Majnu Das is seeking suspension of
sentence and release on bail during pendency of the appeal. He
has been convicted vide judgment dated 25.08.2025 and
sentenced vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed by the learned
Exclusive Special Court of POCSO-cum-District &
Additional Sessions Judge VII, Bhagalpur in POCSO Case
No. 49 of 2022, arising out of Kahalgaon P.S. Case No. 483 of
2021, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 363/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and fine of
Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, S.I. for further
three months, sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and
fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offences punishable under Section
366A/34 of the I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, S.I.
for another six months and further sentenced to undergo R.I.
for fifteen years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 4/17 of the POCSO Act and in
default of payment of fine, further S.I. for six months. All the
sentences were directed to run concurrently in term of Section
31 Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
4/7
10. The prosecution case is based on the First
Information Report dated 26.07.2021 lodged on the basis of
written information of the informant alleging therein that her
daughter, aged about 14 years, was suddenly missing from her
house. Then the informant started searching her and also
contacted all her relatives but her daughter could not find
anywhere. Thereafter, she came to know that Deepak Kumar
Das, Kalpana Devi and Majnu Das have kidnapped her minor
daughter. When the informant contacted Deepak Kumar Das
on his mobile, he told that he has taken her daughter and will
kill her, if she does not marry her daughter with him.
11. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the victim has not made any allegation against the appellant
for committing wrong act with her. The victim has not alleged
any assault by this appellant rather there is specific statement
of the victim that the appellant had left the victim and
Deepak. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. alleged that Deepak had
taken her to a room where Deepak had committed wrong act
with her. There is no allegation against the appellant that he
had either participated in establishing physical relationship or
was present at the time when Deepak was establishing
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
5/7
physical relationship with the victim and had rendered any
assistance to him.
12. Having regard to the submissions noted
hereinabove and the materials on record which we have prima
facie gone through for the purpose of consideration of the
prayer of suspension of sentence and release on bail of the
appellant, we have noticed that in this case, the victim has not
assigned any role to this appellant in the matter of
commission of any wrong act with her. According to the
Fardbeyan of the victim, while she was returning from the
market with the wife of Deepak and mother of Majnu
(appellant), Deepak and Majnu both came on a motorcycle
and she was forcibly made to sit on the motorcycle. Wife of
Deepak and mother of Majnu have been acquitted. The victim
was taken to Ekchari where she was given to eat something
and then she had gone unconscious to some extent but she
was conscious partially. She has not alleged any assault by
this appellant rather it is her specific statement that this
appellant had left the victim and Deepak. She has alleged in
her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that Deepak
had taken her to a room where he had committed wrong act
with her. We have further noticed that the victim was taken to
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
6/7
Delhi from Bhagalpur and it has come in the evidence of the
I.O. (PW-6) that during the investigation, the victim and
Deepak were caught without ticket at Delhi, whereafter,
brother of the victim came from Chandigarh and took her
along with him to her village, thereafter, they went to the
Police Station. We have also noticed the medical report which
is available on the record and which shows that the victim
was carrying 23 weeks pregnancy at the time of her recovery.
The brother of victim (P.W. – 4) has deposed that he had gone
to the house of Majnu to enquire about his sister but he was
abused there. The submission is that for this reason Majnu has
been falsely implicated. It is in this background of the
material present on the record, there being no allegation
against this appellant that he had either participated in
establishing physical relationship or was present at the time
when Deepak was establishing physical relationship with the
victim and had rendered any assistance to him, finding that
the appellant has not done any overt act and there is no
offensive statement and the charges against him under Section
4 / 17 of the POCSO Act are not likely to sustain in ultimate
analysis, we direct suspension of sentence and release of the
above- named appellant on bail during pendency of the appeal
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.297 of 2023(3) dt.16-07-2026
7/7
on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Case of POCSO-
cum-District & Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Bhagalpur in
POCSO Case No. 49 of 2022, arising out of Kahalgaon P.S.
Case No. 483 of 2021.
13. Fine, if any, imposed as part of sentence as
against the appellant shall remain suspended during pendency
of the appeal.
14. Let it be recorded that the observations made by
this Court are only tentative in nature and shall not cause
prejudice to the either parties at the time of final hearing of
the appeals.
15. List this appeal for hearing on its own turn.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.)
rakhi/-
U T
