Abhishek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46114 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2024 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar son of Sri Laxmi Lal Rai R/O Vill-Bardiha Turki, PsPatepur, Dist-Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sanju Kumari Wife of Bhim Raj Kunwar R/O Vill-Bardiha Turki, PsPatepur, Dist-Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, Sr, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Shivjee Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2025 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shivjee Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Mr. Mohammed Arif, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 20.03.2024 in connection with Patepur P.S. Case No. 70 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 08.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the POCSO Act but the police after investigation have submitted charge sheet under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act but the learned Court below has framed charge against the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46114 of 2025(4) dt.18-09-2025 2/3 under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 25.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 56341 of 2024.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2024 but the trial is not in progress as yet.
5. Vide order dated 11.07.2025 a report was called with regard to the present stage of trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 01.08.2025 reveals that out of 7 charge sheet witnesses, 4 witnesses have been examined and the case is pending for the examination of rest of the prosecution witnesses.
6. The learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in the F.I.R as well as report of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Patepur P.S. Case No. 70 of 2024 pending in the court of learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46114 of 2025(4) dt.18-09-2025 3/3 Additional District Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge POCSO, Vaishali, Hajipur.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T