Md. Shahrukh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89928 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-488 Year-2024 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Shahrukh Son of Md. Ifran @ Irfan @ Bhola @ Bhola Khan Resident of Village - Malaria Office, Baksariya Tola, P.S. - Sultanganj, Dist. - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XXX Wife of YYY Resident of Village - Malaria Office, Baksariya Tola, P.S. - Sultanganj, Dist. - Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md. Fahar Imran, Advocate Mr. Syed Imran Gheni, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP For the O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Arya, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 488 of 2024 dated 14.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 331(3), 331(4), 75, 76, 123 of B.N.S. and Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the child of the informant went missing on 01.11.2024 at 04:10 AM, search was made and at 05:45 AM she was recovered, the informant came

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89928 of 2025(3) dt.19-03-2026 2/3 to know after viewing the CCTV footage that one person lifted her daughter and was taking away. When the video was shown to the nearby people, they identified the person who was taking the victim to be petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is a delay of 14 days in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no CCTV footage was procured and only it is stated that the Investigating Officer saw the CCTV footage. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.11.2024 and he is accused in one more case in which he is on bail.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, while learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has stated that the trial has reached its fag and only the Investigating Officer of the case is required to be examined. Moreover, the report of the trial which was called for by order dated 15.01.2026 would go to show that the trial court would take endeavour to conclude the trial within six months by its report dated 30.01.2026.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89928 of 2025(3) dt.19-03-2026 3/3

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fag end of trial, this court is not inclined to allow the prayer for bail to the petitioner and accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 488 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cumExclusive Special Court (POCSO Act), Patna.

7. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial as mentioned in its report.

(Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T