Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. Raja @ Abdul Malik @ AmalikversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The bail application was denied.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Raja (Abdul Malik), was charged under IPC sections 376, 504, 506/34 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 6 for allegedly establishing a physical relationship with the informant under the pretext of marriage, refusing to marry, and threatening to release obscene videos. The informant, who was found pregnant, supported the allegations with a medical report. The petitioner claimed innocence, alleging a land dispute and seeking regular bail, asserting a clean antecedent and custody since 09‑09‑2025. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the supporting medical evidence. The Court, considering the gravity of the accusations, rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial within one year.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged offences under IPC and POCSO Act
  • Whether the allegations and medical evidence constitute sufficient ground to deny bail
  • Whether the trial should be expedited due to the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial custody

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • rape
  • POCSO
  • criminal intimidation
  • sexual assault
  • pre‑trial detention
  • trial expeditious

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11440 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2024 Thana- PUWAKHALI District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Raja @ Abdul Malik @ Amalik S/o Late Jamil Akthar Resident of
                 Village- Tellibhitta, Ward no. 7, P.S- Powakhali, Dist- Kishanganj, Bihar

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X D/o Y Resident of Village- Tellibhitta, Ward no. 7, P.S- Pawakhali, Dist-
                 Kishanganj, Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   11-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant

                   and learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Pawakahali P. S. Case No. 53 of 2024 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and Sections 4/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

                   Offences Act.

                                3. It is alleged that on pretext of marriage, this

                   petitioner repeatedly established physical relation with the

                   informant and thereafter refused to marry and threatened to

                   make her obscene videos viral, if she disclosed the ordeal to

                   anyone.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11440 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                                     4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                        petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter

                        of fact, there is land dispute between the parties and petitioner

                        has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner claims clean

                        antecedent and is in custody since 09.09.2025.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned

                        counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail

                        application and submitted that there is specific accusation

                        against the petitioner that he established physical relation with

                        the informant repeatedly and thereafter refused to marry.

                        Medical report of the victim also supports the allegation as she

                        was found two months’ pregnant.

                                     6. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of

                        the offence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

                                     7. However, since petitioner is in custody since

                        09.09.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the

                        trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of

                        receipt/production of copy of this order.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.