Chandan Kumar Sah @ Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16703 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-387 Year-2025 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Sah @ Chandan Kumar S/o Mohan Sah R/o vill - Gandhi Nagar, ward no. 18, P.s.- Bagha, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XXX W/o YYY R/o vill - Ghuran, P.S.- Supaul, Distt.- Supaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 03.10.2025, in connection with POCSO Case No. 90/2025 arising out of Supaul P.S. Case No. 387/2025, FIR dated 26.07.2025 registered for the offence under Sections 96, 137(2) 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 and other co-accused persons have conspired together and abducted the minor daughter of the informant by alluring her and taken her away and they have sold her somewhere and are making her to do immoral acts.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16703 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026 2/2 been implicated in this case merely on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 03.10.2025.

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 victim has fully supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C/183 BNSS and medical report of the victim suggest that the rape cannot be ruled out and apart from that date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2008 which suggest that on the alleged date of occurrence she was minor.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 387/2025 pending in the Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Supaul.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T