Satya @ Shakti @ Shatrudhan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40759 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2024 Thana- SILAO District- Nalanda ====================================================== Satya @ Shakti @ Shatrudhan S/o Bhola Kumar R/o Vill-Mitma, P.S-Silao, Dist-Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Md. Julafkkar S/o Md. Yusuf Muhuram R/o Mohalla - Haidarganj, Karah, P.s.- Silao, Distt.- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Raj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Silao P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024, Special POCSO Case No. 142 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 366A of the Indian Penal Code and 8/12 of the POCSO Act.
3. Accusation against the petitioner is of luring away the victim girl on the pretext of marriage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that victim in her Statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40759 of 2025(4) dt.10-09-2025 2/2 specifically stated that this petitioner never gave any compulsion or threat to her. He further submitted that nothing has been whispered against the petitioner in Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 12.09.2024 and has one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant further submitted that trial has concluded and the case is fixed for judgment.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the present stage of trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T