IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39375 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2023 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ======================================================

Brishan Patel @ Brishin Patel son of Gulzar Prasad @ Gulzar Prasad Patel R/o Village -Nagwa, P.S. -Patdhi Belsar, Dist.- Vaishali P/A- At gulzar Mansion, Road No. 10, Rajendra Nagar, Ps- Kadam Kuan, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Juli Kumari Daughter of Harendra Ray village- Basauli, Ps- Kudhani, Dist-

Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate Mrs. Shashi Priya, Advocate Mr. Kaushal Kishor, Advocate Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY

CAV JUDGMENT

Date : 26-02-2026 Heard Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mrs. Shashi Priya, learned counsel, for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present application has been filed by the petitioner invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court for quashing the order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Court POCSO (II), Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No.56 of 20236 (Muzaffarpur) by which application for discharge filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

3. The facts giving rise to the present application are to the effect that the complainant/ opposite party no.2 had met with the petitioner, who is a political leader, in a public meeting where she requested the petitioner for employment, upon which the petitioner gave her his name and mobile number with address and told her to meet him at Patna. Later on, the complainant/opposite party no.2 received a phone call in which she was told to meet the petitioner. When complainant /opposite party no.2 reached the apartment of the petitioner, she found some girls were also present at his flats. The petitioner told him that he was in search of some talented girl to give a ticket to contest the election from RJD. Thereafter, she was made to stay in the same flat as the petitioner and in the night the petitioner sexually abused her and, despite her cries and protests, made physical relationship with the complainant. It is further alleged that the petitioner frequently started sexually abusing her and on protest, the petitioner blackmailed the complainant/opposite party no.2 by showing her obscene pictures and video clips. Anyhow, the complainant/opposite party no.2 managed to get the pictures and video clip on her mobile phone and narrated the whole incident to her family. It is further alleged that the complainant and her family members were threatened to be killed by the petitioner and thereafter the complainant/opposite party no.2 went to the police station and lastly she filed a complaint bearing Complaint Case No. 56 of 2023 (Muzaffarpur).

4. Thereafter, the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation along with three inquiry witnesses, namely, Ravi Prakash, Manjay Kumar and Vikash Kumar and thereafter the learned Special Judge POCSO-II took cognizance for the offences under Sections 6, 12, 14 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 as well as under Sections 323, 341, 354(B), 420 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons against the petitioner.

5. The petitioner filed an application under Section

227 of the Cr.P.C. for discharge. The learned Court upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 rejected the application of the petitioner for discharge vide impugned order dated 13.02.2025.

6. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has passed the order taking cogni