Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1966/2026rejected

Ankit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-20Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1966 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2025 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ankit Kumar Son of Shashi Kumar Singh Resident of Village - Mahurawan, P.S. - Rohtas, Dist. - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Aanand Raj Son of Late Arjun Prasad R/o Champa Niwas, Navin Nagar, P.S. - Nawada(Town), Dist. - Nawada, Present posted as Anumandal Backward Class and Ati Pichada Varg Welfare Padadhikari, Head Officeer cum Nodal Padadhikari Jan Nayak Karpuri Thakur Welfare Hostal Women College Compound in Dehri, P.S. - Dehri(Town), Dist. - Rohtas. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 14.08.2025, in connection with Dehri(Town) P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025, FIR dated 20.07.2025 registered for the offence under Sections 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that daughter of the informant became traceless after she went outside of her hostel stating that she had to go home after coaching.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 1966 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026 2/2 as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R and he has been made accused due to village politics. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 14.08.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State on the basis of material available on record has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the victim has supported the case of the prosecution which is recorded in paragraph-71 of the case diary and alleged that the petitioner had forcibly established physical relation with her.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Dehri(Town) P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025, pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Exclusive Special Court (POCSO), Rohtas, Sasaram.

7. Prayer is refused.

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