Patna High CourtCR. MISC./64067/2025bail rejected

Aman Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-25Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64067 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2023 Thana- PALI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Aman Kumar Son of Rajesh Sao @ Bhutahi Sao R/o - Rajgir, Tulsi Gali, Nichali Bajar, Near Masjid, Ward No.17, P.S - Rajgir, District - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Mr. X Son of Mahendar Bind R/o of Village and Post Uttar Sherthu, P.S.- Pali(Kako), Dist. - Jehanabad, ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 31 of 2023 arising out of Pali P.S. Case No. 12 of 2023, lodged on 08.01.2023, under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, Sections 368, 370A, 372, 373, 376, 379, 411 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code were added, along with Sections 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's bail application was earlier rejected twice vide order dated 01.11.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 69555 of 2023 and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64067 of 2025(5) dt.25-02-2026 2/2 vide order dated 06.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48785 of 2024. He further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.06.2023. He further submits that a report regarding the present stage of the trial was called for. He also submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody.

4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is a direct allegation under the POCSO Act against the petitioner. He further submits that from the report it transpires that out of seven witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, including the victim, four witnesses have already been examined.

5. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U