Patna High CourtCR. MISC./70333/2025rejected

Mithun Mandal @ Mithun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-19Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70333 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2025 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== Mithun Mandal @ Mithun Kumar S/o Babu Lal Mandal @ Bablu Mandal Resident of Village - Meghu Tola, Post - Gopalpur, P.S - Amdabad, District - Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

X W/o - Y R/o - Z, The SHO, Amdabad Police Station, Katihar in Amdabad P.S Case No. 149/2025, District - Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kalyan Shankar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard Mr. Suresh Prasad Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kalyan Shankar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 20.06.2025 in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 149 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 20.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 64 of B.N.S, 2023 and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.

3. According to prosecution case, petitioner committed rape upon the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70333 of 2025(6) dt.19-03-2026 2/2 implicated in the present case. Allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Due to some village politics, petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that statement of the victim were recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the B.N.S in which she has fully supported the case of the prosecution.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 149 of 2025 pending in the court of learned D.A.S.J-VII-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Katihar.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) vashudha/- U T