Patna High Court
Mohan Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court declined to grant bail, holding that the nature of the offence and the Supreme Court precedent require the accused to remain in custody.
Summary
Mohan Kumar Sharma was arrested for allegedly trafficking two minor girls for prostitution and is charged under several sections of the B.N.S. and section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. He applied for regular bail after being in custody since 14 April 2025. The Patna High Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine 781), declined to grant bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. The court directed that the trial be completed within six months of the order and allowed the petitioner to renew the bail plea if the prosecution caused any delay. No comment was made on the merits of the case; the order pertained solely to the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused in a child‑trafficking case under the specified sections of the B.N.S. and section 4 of the POCSO Act
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent in Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh is applicable to deny bail in the present case
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 140(3), 3(5), 351(3), 352
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — s. 4
Subjects
- regular bail
- child trafficking
- POCSO Act
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal procedure
- minor victims
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61347 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2025 Thana- BALTHAR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Mohan Kumar Sharma S/O Prabhu Das Resident of Village- Magi Colony,
P.S- Maranga, District- Purniya( Bihar).
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jahir Ahmad S/O Emam Hasan R/O Village- Lakhoura, P.S- Balthar, Dist.-
West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 30-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in
connection with Balthar P.S. Case No.44 of 2025 registered for
the offence under sections 137(2), 140(3), 352, 351(3) and 3(5)
of the B.N.S. and under section 4 of the POCSO Act.
3. The petitioner and others were caught red
handed trafficking two minor victims for prostitution. The
statements of the victims also support the allegation.
4. The petitioners are in custody since
14.04.2025.
5. Considering the nature of allegation and also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61347 of 2025(5) dt.30-03-2026
2/2
considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed
in the case of Pinki Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported as 2025
SCC OnLine 781, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner. Accordingly, this application is rejected.
6. The trial is directed to be concluded within
six months from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of
this order. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the
petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
7. It is clarified that this Court has not
expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the
observations made by this Court is only for the purpose of
deciding this bail application.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.