Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. Avad Alam @ Md Ibad Alam @ Md. IbadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, finding the allegations and victim’s statement sufficient to justify continued custody.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Avad Alam, applied for regular bail in a case where a 13‑year‑old girl alleged she was abducted and forced upon by the accused. The prosecution alleged the petitioner was one of seven accused who took the girl, and the FIR was lodged two days after the incident. The petitioner argued he was falsely implicated, highlighted a delay in filing the FIR, and cited a medical report indicating the girl’s age was 15‑17, which he claimed undermined the charge. The court considered the victim’s statement recorded under section 183 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, which directly named the petitioner and described forced intercourse. Weighing the seriousness of the allegations and the victim’s testimony, the court refused bail and ordered the trial court to expedite the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
  • Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the medical report on the victim’s age affect the bail application.
  • Whether the victim’s statement under section 183 of the BNSS justifies denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • sexual assault
  • false implication
  • FIR delay
  • victim testimony
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17029 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2025 Thana- DAGARUA District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Avad Alam @ Md Ibad Alam @ Md. Ibad S/O Md. Sarfaraj Alam @
                 Sarfaraj Alam R/O Village - Chandbhati, P.S- Dagarua, District- Purnia

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XX W/O Y R/O Village - Udharna Ward no- 03, P.S- Dargarua, District-
                 Purnia

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Hira Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
                                                  Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Md Fazle Karim, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-05-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Dagarua P.S. Case

                   no.337 of 2025, registered under sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of

                   the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that his 13 year old daughter was taken away by the seven

                   named accused persons including the petitioner herein and she

                   was not to be found inspite of search.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is an
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17029 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
                                                         2/2




                       unexplained delay of two days in lodging of the FIR. In the

                       medical report her age has been estimated to be 15-17 years and

                       the same does not support the prosecution case. The petitioner

                       is in custody since 8.9.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                       for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in

                       the FIR together with the statement of the 13 year old victim

                       recorded under section 183 of the BNSS wherein she names the

                       petitioner and states that the petitioner forced himself upon her,

                       the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the

                       application is rejected.

                                    7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-

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.