IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.177 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2025 Thana- SHANKARPUR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Mithu Kumar son of Manoj Mehta Resident Of Village -chauraha, Ward No 10, P.s. -Shankarpur, District -Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. X Wife of Y Resident Of Village -chauraha, Ward No 10, P.s. -Shankarpur, District -Madhepura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 06-04-2026 Despite valid service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2. 2. Heard Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 23.06.2025 in connection with Shankarpur P.S. Case No.120 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 21.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 65of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and ¾ of POCSO Act. 4. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the when the informant went to field for plucking moong and her daughter was alone at her home, taking advantage of the situation, petitioner entered the house of the informant and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.177 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 forcefully started bad act with her daughter. On being seen this incident by the neighbors, they raised alarm and caught-hold the accused and handed over to the police. Thereafter, FIR has been lodged. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 BNSS in which he did not support the case of the prosecution and apart from that she has refused for her medical examination. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2025. 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner has clean antecedent and victim did not support the case of the prosecution and she has refused for her medical examination, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.177 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 POCSO, Madhepura in connection with Shankarpur P.S. Case No.120 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. Suruchi/- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) U T