Raushan Kumar KarnversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80890 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Raushan Kumar Karn S/O Dinesh Lal Karn R/O Janakpur, P.S.- Mujaulia,
                 District- Dhanush (Nepal).
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Mahashweta Sinha, Inspector-cum-S.H.O., Mahila P.S- Saran Camp-
                 Puchhari Bazar P.S- Baniyapur, Distt.- Saran.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Harish Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-02-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

                                2. Learned A.P.P. for the State submitted that he has

                   informed the informant of this case through S.H.O concern, but

                   no one appears on behalf of the informant.

                               3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Saran

                   Mahila P.S. case No. 68 of 2025, instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 79, 111, 141, 143, 145, 98, 296 and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, section 13/14 of POCSO Act

                   and section 79 of the J.J.Act and Section 16 of the Bonded

                   Labour Act.

                               4. Allegation against the accused persons including the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80890 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner is that they were caught with minor girls who were

          employed in the orchestra allegedly being run by the petitioner

          and others.

                      5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

          petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

          present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

          general and omnibus allegation has been made against the

          petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is

          labourer in the orchestra. He used to arrange sound box in the

          orchestra. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

          the petitioner is in custody since 03.08.2025 and has no criminal

          antecedent.

                      6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned

          APP further submitted that victim in her statement recorded

          under Section 183 of the BNSS has corroborated the contents of

          the FIR, and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be

          released on bail.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not

          inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

                       8. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80890 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                                  9. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

                                  10. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to

                     renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the

                     trial is not concluded within a period of six months from today.

                     If any such application is filed before the learned court below,

                     the court concerned shall consider the same on its own merit

                     without being prejudiced by this order.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T