Ajeet Kumar Singh @ Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65340 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2025 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna ====================================================== Ajeet Kumar Singh @ Ajit Kumar S/o Rameshwar Prasad Singh Resident of Mohalla- Anterjoti Blind Girls School, Kumrhrar, PS- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna, at present R/o vill - Fatehpur, P.S.- Raghopur, Distt.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajeev Kumar S/o Sri Ramashray Sharma @ Ramashray Ram R/o Mohalla - Virla Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, Distt.- Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Binay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 188 of 2025 arising out of Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 506 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section 64(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he sexually exploited the informant's minor daughter over a long period and threatened her not to disclose the said acts to anyone.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65340 of 2025(4) dt.01-12-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that there is sufficient delay in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel further submitted that during investigation, the statement of other students were taken but none has supported the case of the prosecution. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 28.06.2025 and has no 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 APP further submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has corroborated the contents of the FIR and the same is further substantiated by the medical report of the victim, and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the nature and gravity of offence, 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65340 of 2025(4) dt.01-12-2025 3/3

8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as per the statutory provisions.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T