Dismissed¶21

Rambachchan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Feb 2026CR. MISC./79007/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.79007 of 2025, decided 06-02-2026 by Ramesh Chand Malviya, J. Second bail application of Rambachchan Sharma, accused with informant XYZ (wife of Santu Ram) under S.87 BNS and S.8/12 POCSO Act in POCSO Case No.12/2025 (PS Case No.14/2025, Sarmera, Nalanda) for abduction of a minor with intention to marry; earlier bail rejected 02.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.16756/2025; no fresh ground; bail again rejected; trial to be completed within 3 months.

What did the court decide?

Since there is no fresh ground to reconsider the prayer for bail, the petitioner's successive regular bail application is again rejected. ¶19

Rambachchan Sharma Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79007 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2025 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rambachchan Sharma, aged about-30 years, Son of Shankar Mistri @ Shankar Sharma Resident Of Village- Sarsa, Ps- Lachhuara, Dist- Jamui

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

XYZ wife of Santu Ram Resident Of Village- Sarmera, Ps- Sarmera, DistNalanda

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hansraj, Advocate Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

7 06-02-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is accused in a case registered for the offense punishable under sections 87 of the BNS and Section 8/12 of the POCSO Act in connection with POCSO Case No.12 of 2025.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, who is a married man, is alleged to have abducted the minor daughter, of the informant with an intention to marry her.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner has got no criminal

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79007 of 2025(7) dt.06-02-2026 2/2

¶18

antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition and he is in custody since 25.01.2025.

¶19

Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2025 passed in Cr. Miscellaneous No.16756 of 2025 and there is no fresh ground to reconsider the prayer of bail of this petitioner.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application of this petitioner is

¶21

again rejected.

¶22

The learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as soon as possible within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶24

Harshita/-

¶25

U T

Rambachchan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambachchan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Mahalaxmi Construction Through Its Proprietor Sri Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Bharat Construction Through Its Proprietor Md. Jamil Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Smt. Shanti Devi Vs Vidyasagar Pathak

Abdul Kalam @ Abul Kalam Vs Harihar Singh and Ors.

Kuldeep Kashyap Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar Agrawal Vs Sanjay Kumar Agrawal