Patna High Court – Orders
Akash Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 19 March, 2026
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73932 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-694 Year-2023 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Akash Kumar S/o Late Birendra Yadav @ Balindra Yadav Resident of village
- Serthua, P.S - Makhdumpur, Tehta O.P, District - Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X S/o Withheld R/o Village - Withheld, Tola - Salempur, P.S - Kako
Bhelawar O.P, District - Jehanabad
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mungeshwar Kumar. Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Nirmala Kumari, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Amar Jyoti Sharma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-03-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.
Mungeshwar Kumar, learned counsel for the informant Mr.
Amar Jyoti Sharma and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
Ms. Nirmala Kumari for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
13.05.2025 in connection with Makhdumpur (Tehta OP) P.S.
Case No. 694 of 2023 for the offences punishable under
Sections 363, 366(A), 365, 376, 376(3), 370(4), 372, 373,
120(B) and 34 of IPC, Sections 4,6, 8 of POCSO Act and
Sections 8 and 9 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and
Sections 9,10 and 11 of Child Marriage Prohibition Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that her daughter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73932 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
went to take coaching class on 03-11-2023 but did not return
and she is a minor aged about 14 years and student of class 9, he
further alleged that after searching, he came to know him that
one Akash Kumar (petitioner) and Ankit Kumar with their
common intention taken her daughter by enticing her with bad
intention, as such, the informant got full faith and belief that
petitioner took away her daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and
learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the informant submits that the statement of
victim was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS on
videoconferencing where she has stated that the petitioner has
committed rape upon her. Apart from that the petitioner has also
sold the victim to another person and also the medical report of
the victim support the allegation as alleged in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73932 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the present case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail arising out of Makhdumpur (Tehta OP) P.S. Case No. 694
of 2023 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Jehanabad.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T