IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54993 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2024 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Ghuran Mahto @ Ghuran Mandal S/o- Ramu Mahto Resident of Village- Rampur Bahor PS-Singhiya, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar Bihar 2. Poonam Devi W/o- Bilash Mandal Village- Kaina Ps- Singhiya Dist- Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 6 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State. 2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 76, 352 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant and attempted to commit rape upon her. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The statement of the victim in her fard beyan and under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. are contradictory. In written report, the mother of the victim has stated that the petitioner himself untied the victim whereas Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54993 of 2025(6) dt.04-02-2026 2/2 the victim states that her sister came and rescued her. Learned counsel, by drawing my attention towards the panchnama i.e. annexure- P/2, has submitted that there is dispute regarding pathway between the informant and the petitioner. The petitioner has remained under custody for near about a year. 5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no land dispute or pathway dispute between the parties. The panchnama is not admitted by the informant. 6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances especially the fact that petitioner has remained under custody for near about a year, let the petitioner above-named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Session Judge-VI-cum-Special Court POCSO, Samastipur in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court. kundan/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U T