Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28631 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Singh S/o Randhir Singh @ Pappu Singh Resident of Village- Mohiddinpur Rajwa @ Rajwa Tajpur, P.S.- Bangra, Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Mamta Kumari W/o Kripashankar Jha R/o Mohalla- Aadarsh Nagar Gali No. 5A, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Matloob Rab- A.P.P.

Mr.Raja Ram Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 329(4), 78, 352 of the B.N.S. and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.01.2024, he has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that petitioner and his friend Randhir used to act inappropriately with her minor daughter whenever she used to go to the coaching.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28631 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/3

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that elder daughter of the informant used to work in the firm of the petitioner where she is alleged to have misappropriated huge amount of money and out of ill-will the instant FIR came to be instituted. It is next submitted that charges against the petitioner has been framed and one witness has been examined.

5. Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant oppose the bail application and submits that petitioner has created a defence. It is next submitted that had the elder daughter of the informant misappropriated any money from the firm of the petitioner, in that event, the petitioner would have instituted a criminal case, but then, no case came to be instituted. It is further submitted that charges have been framed and one witness has been examined.

6. After hearing the learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for bail stands rejected.

8. However, the learned trial Court is requested to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28631 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 3/3 expedite the trial of the Case.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T