Patna High Court
Md. Shamim Akhter @ Shamim AkhterversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court refused to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, allowing a re‑application after six months if the trial is not concluded.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Shamim Akhter, was charged with multiple offences including murder, kidnapping, and several counts of rape under the IPC, the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and the POCSO Act. The alleged victim, a 16‑year‑old girl, claimed she was repeatedly raped by the petitioner and three accomplices after being drugged. The petitioner, who was in prison for a drug conviction until November 2024, sought regular bail after being taken into custody for these charges. The trial court had framed charges on 21‑04‑2025 and, under Section 35 of the POCSO Act, the trial must conclude within a year. The High Court held that bail could not be granted at this stage, directing the petitioner to re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending, and ordered the trial court to proceed as per the statutory timeline. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of multiple serious offences including rape of a minor under the POCSO Act.
- Whether Section 6 of the POCSO Act is attracted when the victim's age has not been formally determined.
- Whether the requirement of Section 35 of the POCSO Act to conclude the trial within a year affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6, 8
- Indian Penal Code — s. 313, 34, 372, 373, 376(2), 376(A), 376(D)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 35, 6
Subjects
- regular bail
- POCSO Act
- rape of minor
- trial timeline
- IPC offences
- Immoral Traffic Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62009 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2015 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Md. Shamim Akhter @ Shamim Akhter Son of Naimuddin Village-Sikandra
Pur Tola ,P.S-Phenhara ,District-East Champaran At P/A- Ramchandra Dhaka,
Ps- Dhaka, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anshu Priya @ Simran Khatoon Daughter of Late Rajeev Kumar Singh
Resident of Village- Rasul Pur, PS- Dumra Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
CAV ORDER
6 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 313,
376(A), 376(D), 376(2), 372, 373 & 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 & 8 of the Immoral traffic
(Prevention) Act and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the
informant’s late mother Khushboo Singh @ Reena Singh was
having illicit relationship with the petitioner. The father of the
informant was dumb by birth and he was being killed by the
petitioner and informant’s mother six years ago. The informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62009 of 2025(6) dt.13-03-2026
2/4
is aged about 16 years. After this, the mother of the informant
along with the informant and her brother Amandeep started
living with the petitioner at Azad Chowk P.S.- Dhaka, District-
East Champaran in a tenanted house. It is further alleged that
after some time, the petitioner killed the mother and brother of
the informant and took the informant to Mohalla Dagapara at
Siliguri at his house. It is further alleged that the petitioner
started raping her and when the informant objected, she was
being slapped and was injected intoxicant drugs and in state of
unconsciousness, she was being raped by the petitioner. It is
further alleged that the petitioner used to call three other persons
namely Raju Mian, Khalid and Chandan and she was compelled
to have intercourse with them and it is further alleged that the
petitioner used to inject her with intoxicant and after that all
three named persons committed rape with her. It is further
alleged that the petitioner has left her twice in hotel at Siliguri
with somebody else and she was being raped in the hotel also.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that this case was registered on 24.02.2015 and the petitioner
was arrested on 24.11.2016 at Nepal in a drug case in which the
petitioner was convicted for eight years and was serving his
sentence till 26.11.2024. Thereafter on 27.11.2024, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62009 of 2025(6) dt.13-03-2026
3/4
petitioner was handed over to Indian Government and he is in
custody in this case from 28.11.2024. It has further been
submitted that during investigation co-accused Md. Eshrar @
Md. Ishrar has been granted bail by learned Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 29349 of 2015 and later on co-
accused Raju Mian and Md. Ishrar have been acquitted in Cr.
App. (DB) Nos. 873 of 2017 and 689 of 2017 respectively by
the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment
dated 18.01.2023. It has further been submitted that the age of
the victim was not determined by the Court of competent
jurisdiction and as such Section 6 of the POCSO Act is not
attracted. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that during course of investigation the medical
examination of the victim was conducted and the Doctor
conducting medical of the victim has not found any abnormality.
Medical system opinion- normal appearing and has opined that
no definite opinion regarding rape can be given.
5. During course of investigation the victim has given
her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and from perusal
of the order of the learned trial court it transpires that in this
case charges were framed on 21.04.2025.
6. Since charge has been framed in this case on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62009 of 2025(6) dt.13-03-2026
4/4
21.04.2025 and Section 35 of the POCSO Act provides that the
trial of rape must be concluded within a year.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of
the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this
stage, however, he may renew his prayer for bail after six
months if the trial is not concluded and the learned trial court is
directed to proceed in this case in a manner as provided under
Section 35 of the POCSO Act.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 19.02.2026
Uploading Date 13.03.2026
Transmission Date 13.03.2026
Checking your session…