Patna High CourtCR. MISC./86258/2024rejected

Banti Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-16Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86258 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2024 Thana- BANKA District- Banka ====================================================== Banti Kumar Son of Ram Chandra Sah Resident Of Village -Lilagora, PSBanka, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Sunita Devi Wife of Sandi Yadav Resident of Village- Lilaghoda, PostDudhari, P.S.- Banka, Distt.- Banka ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2026 Heard Mr.Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 08.08.2024 in connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 05.08.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 96 of BNS, 2023 and subsequently chargesheet has been submitted under Section 96 of the BNS, 2023 and Section 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused person, namely, Mantun Kumar Sah lured the informant's minor daughter and took her away with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86258 of 2024(6) dt.16-03-2026 2/3 them.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR, apart from that, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the FIR that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and the victim was recovered and her statement under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 was recorded in which she has fully supported the case of the prosecution, apart from the aforesaid, it reveals from the report of the learned Trial Court that the trial has begun and out of six chargesheet witnesses, five witnesses have been examined and only one witness i.e. the Doctor (Medical Officer) is yet to be examined and the victim has supported the case of the prosecution during the trial.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Additional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86258 of 2024(6) dt.16-03-2026 3/3 Sessions Judge-6-cum-Special Judge (POCSO, Banka.

7. Prayer is refused.

8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T