Patna High Court
Md. AbubversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The petitioner is not entitled to bail at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Abub, was charged with kidnapping, rape and offences under the POCSO Act for allegedly abducting the informant's minor daughter. He sought bail, claiming innocence and asserting that the victim’s statement under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita indicated a consensual relationship, marriage, and that she was not kidnapped. The State opposed bail, presenting testimony from the victim and her father supporting the prosecution’s case. The Court considered the seriousness of the charges, the victim’s minority, and the corroborative evidence, and concluded that bail could not be granted at this stage. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial within a year.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving kidnapping, rape and POCSO offences against a minor.
- Whether the victim’s statement under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita affects the assessment of the prima facie case for bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 6
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- rape
- POCSO
- minor
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 70731 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2024 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Abub Son of Md. Wasil Resident Of Village -Bishanpur Ward No 12
Police Station -Raniganj District -Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjila Khatoon Wife of Md. Nasir Resident Of Village -Bishanpur Ward No
12 Police Station -Raniganj District -Araria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
Mr. Vijay Kishore Bharti, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Raniganj P.S. Case No. 207 of 2024 dated 18.05.2024 which
was initially instituted for offences punishable under Sections
363 and 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the police
have subsequently submitted the charge sheet under Sections
366A and 376 of the I.P.C. along with Section 6 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
3. The petitioner along with co -accused Md. Mofij is
alleged to have abducted the informant’s daughter on a
motorcycle.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 70731 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that the statement of the victim
girl was recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 wherein, she stated that a love affair had
been going on with the petitioner for the past four years and on
the alleged date of occurrence, she left her house and went to
Punjab along with the petitioner, where she solemnized her
marriage with him. She stated she was not kidnapped. Further, it
is submitted that the so-called victim has given birth to a baby,
who is now aged about one month. Learned counsel also
submits that out of seven charge-sheet witnesses, only two
witnesses have been examined so far. Lastly, it is submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 01.06.2025 and has no
criminal antecedents. Charge has already been framed in the
present case.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and the learned
APP for the State have opposed the prayer for bail. It is
submitted that two witnesses, namely, the father of the victim,
Nasir (PW-1) and the victim herself (PW-2) have been
examined during the trial and have categorically supported the
prosecution case. It is further submitted that the victim is a
minor girl and has stated that the petitioner established physical
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 70731 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
relations with her against her will.
6. Considering the serious nature of the allegations
coupled with the fact that the victim is a minor as also the
corroboration of the prosecution case by the father (PW1) and
the victim (PW 2) and the gravity of the offences, this Court
finds that the petitioner is not entitled to bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial and take all endeavour to conclude the trial at
the earliest, preferably, within a period of one year from the date
of receipt or production of a copy of this order.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
Checking your session…