IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28798 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2025 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sameer Ansari @ Md. Sameer, Gender-Male, Aged about 20 years, S/o Md. Jahangir Ansari @ Md. Jahagir Ansari @ Md. Jahangir, Resident of Village – Kharjamma, Ward No. 1, Police Station - Mahnar, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. XXX W/o YYY R/o Village - Kharjamma, P.S - Mahnar, District - Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 4 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary. 2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 65(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Allegation against the petitioner is to have forcibly made physical relationship with the daughter of the informant and thereafter the petitioner was fled away from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28798 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 2/3 suspicion. He next submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged in the present FIR and further states that the informant demanded money from the petitioner for her use and on denial, she implicated in the present case, he has got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 14.12.2025. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of this petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation for committing rape upon the daughter of informant.

6. On perusal of the first information report, case diary and impugned order dated 11.03.2026, it appears that the petitioner attempted to commit rape forcibly and he was brutally assaulted to the victim and after investigation, the case was found to be true and charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner under Sections 126(2), 124(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 65(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The sisters-in-law of the victim have also supported the occurrence in paragraph nos.3, 66 and 67 of the case diary and the age of the victim is verified in paragraph-16 of the case diary, is approximately 10 years at the time of the alleged occurrence and the victim’s statement is also recorded under Section 183 of the IPC that she was sexually assaulted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28798 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 3/3 and beaten by the petitioner, several witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and the offence is very serious in nature, considering which, I am not inclined to grant regular to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28798 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2025 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sameer Ansari @ Md. Sameer, Gender-Male, Aged about 20 years, S/o Md. Jahangir Ansari @ Md. Jahagir Ansari @ Md. Jahangir, Resident of Village – Kharjamma, Ward No. 1, Police Station - Mahnar, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. XXX W/o YYY R/o Village - Kharjamma, P.S - Mahnar, District - Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 4 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary. 2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 65(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Allegation against the petitioner is to have forcibly made physical relationship with the daughter of the informant and thereafter the petitioner was fled away from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28798 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 2/3 suspicion. He next submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged in the present FIR and further states that the informant demanded money from the petitioner for her use and on denial, she implicated in the present case, he has got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 14.12.2025. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of this petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation for committing rape upon the daughter of informant.

6. On perusal of the first information report, case diary and impugned order dated 11.03.2026, it appears that the petitioner attempted to commit rape forcibly and he was brutally assaulted to the victim and after investigation, the case was found to be true and charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner under Sections 126(2), 124(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 65(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The sisters-in-law of the victim have also supported the occurrence in paragraph nos.3, 66 and 67 of the case diary and the age of the victim is verified in paragraph-16 of the case diary, is approximately 10 years at the time of the alleged occurrence and the victim’s statement is also recorded under Section 183 of the IPC that she was sexually assaulted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28798 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 3/3 and beaten by the petitioner, several witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and the offence is very serious in nature, considering which, I am not inclined to grant regular to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T