Manoj Sada @ Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16714 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2024 Thana- SINGHWARA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Manoj Sada @ Manoj Kumar Son of Sri Subedar Sada Resident of village - Lorika Musahari Tola, Ward No.- 9, P.S.- Singhwara, District - Darbhanga, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

X Wife of Mr. Z Resident of village - Lorika Musahari Tola, Ward No.- 9, P.S.- Singhwara, District - Darbhanga, Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Smiti Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 16-03-2026 Heard Ms. Smiti Bharti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 14.08.2024, in connection with Singhwara P.S. Case No. 229/2024, FIR dated 14.08.2024 registered for the offence under Sections 64,3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

3. Accordingly to the prosecution case, it is alleged that the petitioner forcefully made physical relation with the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. She further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16714 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026 2/2 committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. She next submits that although charge has been framed against the petitioner on 26.06.2025 but the prosecution witnesses have not been examined as yet and the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 14.08.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and victim has fully supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C/183 BNSS.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR supported by the statement of the victim, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Singhwara P.S. Case No. 229/2024 pending in the Special Judge( POCSO Act), Darbhanga.

7. Prayer is refused.

8. However the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T