Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36838 (PAT)

Gulshan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./48246/2025 · 2026-02-10

Sandeep Kumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48246 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2023 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Gulshan Kumar S/o- Pappu Mandal Village- Gangapur Thebhai Tola, Ps- Alamnagar Ratwara OP, Dist-Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Subhash Mandal S/o- Late Buchay Mandal Village- Gangapur Noniyachak Tola Ps- Ratwara Op Dist- Madhepura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh For the State : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Alamnagar (Ratwara O.P.) P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 376, 323, 504,506/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. 3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79899 of 2023, which reads as under: “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48246 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 with Alamnagar P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 376, 323, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of committing rape over a minor girl. 4. Considering the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner of committing rape over a minor girl, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. 6. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest.” 4. The petitioner has been held to be a juvenile. 5. In these circumstances, this application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the Juvenile Justice Board. priyanka/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U T