Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23693 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2023 Thana- NIRMALI District- Supaul ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Son of Mahendra Prasad @ Mahendra Sah Resident of Village- Mahdeva, P.S.- Laukhi, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Hidden D/O- Mangal Sah Resident of Vill and P.S.- Nirmali, DistrictSupaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 30-08-2025 Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 117 of 2023, arising out of Nirmali P.S. Case No. 278 of 2023, dated 14.12.2023, lodged under Sections 363, 366, 366A, 376, 385, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and under Sections 04, 06 & 12 of the POCSO Act, pending before the Court of A.D.J.-VI-cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, Supaul.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 01.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 67923 of 2024 with a liberty that he may renew the prayer for bail one year after the date of cognizance.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23693 of 2025(3) dt.30-08-2025 2/2

4. Senior counsel further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.12.2023 and has clean criminal antecedents. He further submits that till date, according to him, the trial has not been concluded. He also submits that keeping the petitioner in custody shall serve no purpose, hence, bail may be granted to the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined, and the case is presently fixed at the stage under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. It is hereby directed to the Trial Court to conclude the trial within three months.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T