Abhishek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42419 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2025 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar S/o Shravan Kumar R/o Village- Shivsthan Rajgir, P.SRajgir, Dist- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XX YY R/o.- Mohalla- Behind the Kailash Ashram Mandir, P.S- Rajgir, Dist- Nalanda.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms.Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Rajgir P.S. Case No. 294 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 70(2) of B.N.S. and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 26.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 46828 of 2025 which reads as under:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with POCSO case No. 96 of 2025 / Rajgir P.S. Case No. 294 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 70(2) and under Sections 4,6 of the POCSO Act.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42419 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026 2/2

3. As per the prosecution case, gang rape of a 13 year old girl has been committed and the petitioner is said to have provided room for gang rape.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2025.

5. Considering the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial is progressing and till now only four witnesses have been examined.

4. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T