Patna High Court
Gholam Hussain @ Gulam Hussain @ NaiyerversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that bail could not be granted in the present circumstances.
Summary
The petitioner, Gholam Hussain, was arrested in connection with a case alleging that unknown persons raped and murdered a ten‑year‑old girl, the informant’s daughter, under sections 65(2), 66 and 103 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner claimed the case was filed out of a family dispute, that there were no substantive witnesses, and that his name appeared only after forty days; he also asserted he had no prior criminal record and was willing to cooperate with the trial. The State and the informant opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, the victim’s death by throttling, and a confessional statement by the petitioner. The trial court report indicated that no witnesses had yet been examined, though some summons and bailable warrants had been issued. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the stage of investigation, the High Court refused bail and directed the trial court to complete the trial within six months, allowing a fresh bail application thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a case of alleged rape and murder of a minor under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and the POCSO Act.
- Whether the lack of examined witnesses and the seriousness of the offence justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103, 65(2), 66
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- murder
- minor
- POCSO Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- criminal procedure
- trial acceleration
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47501 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2025 Thana- AAJAM NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Gholam Hussain @ Gulam Hussain @ Naiyer S/o Md. Ashfaque @ Md.
Asfak R/o Village- Sisya Purab Tola, ward no. 22, P.S.- Azamnagar, Dist.-
Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajeka Khatoon W/o Md. Shahid R/o Village- Sisya Purab Tola, Ward No. 2,
P.S.- Azamnagar, Dist.- Katihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md Qumrul Hoda, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
For the Informant : Md. Musowir, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
6 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Azamnagar P.S. Case no.64 of
2025 registered under sections 65(2), 66 and 103 of BNS and
Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that some unknown
criminals committed rape with informant’s minor daughter and
also killed her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
informant is the own sister-in-law of the petitioner’s father and
due to earlier dispute, the present case has been lodged. It has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47501 of 2025(6) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
further been submitted that there is no substantial witness to
prove the allegation and the name of the petitioner has
transpired only on suspicion after forty days of F.I.R. It has also
been submitted that no independent witness has been examined
in support of the prosecution case. The petitioner is in custody
since 21.04.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. He undertakes
to cooperate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant on
the ground that deceased is a ten year old girl, who has been
done to death and cause of her death is asphyxia due to
throttling and the materials collected during course of
investigation indicate the complicity of the petitioner coupled
with his confessional statement accepting the guilt.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court
with regard to the stage of the case and letter dated 27.01.2026
would indicate that till date no witness had been examined,
however, summons and bailable warrants have been issued
against prosecution witness. Further, it is informed by the
learned counsel for the informant that two witnesses have
already been examined and five witnesses remain to be
examined. It is undertaken by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47501 of 2025(6) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
informant that the remaining witnesses would be examined
within a period of five months.
7. In such view of the matter, considering the
seriousness of the allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant
the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months,
failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.