Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Gaji Amanullah @ Chhotu @ Gaji AmarullahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court held that bail could not be granted at this stage and dismissed the petition.

Summary

The petitioner, Gaji Amanullah, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 64 and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 7 of the POCSO Act, alleging an attempt to rape the informant's minor daughter. He applied for bail, claiming innocence, lack of criminal antecedents, and that the victim refused a medical examination. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which they said corroborated the FIR. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the victim's statement, and the statutory provisions governing bail in sexual offence cases. Concluding that the circumstances did not warrant release, the court rejected the bail application.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged attempt to rape a minor under the POCSO Act and sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • sexual offence
  • POCSO
  • minor
  • victim statement
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72767 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- PARANDABAR District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Gaji Amanullah @ Chhotu @ Gaji Amarullah Son of Late Asmat Karim
                 Resident Of Village -Khatangi Ps- Parnadabar District- Nawada

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XXX Son of Md. Khairul Resident Of Village -Khatangi Ps- Parnadabar
                 District- Nawada

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
                 For the Informant        :      Mr. Syed Asgher Najmi, Advocate
                                                 Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                                                 Mr. Wjeeha Jafri, Advocate
                                                 Mr. Achyut Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   13-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused

                   the case diary.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Parnadabar P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 64, 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and

                   Sections 4/7 of the POCSO Act.

                               3. Allegation against the petitioner is of trying to

                   commit rape upon the informant’s minor daugther.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72767 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                     present case due to dispute between the parties. Learned counsel

                     further submitted that victim has refused to undergo medical

                     examination. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

                     that the petitioner is in custody since 08.06.2025 and has no

                     criminal antecedent.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for

                     the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to

                     the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that victim in her

                     statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has

                     corroborated the contents of the FIR, and therefore, the

                     petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case also Section 183 Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha

                     Sanhita, 2023 statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined

                     to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

                                  7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the

                     petitioner is, hereby, rejected.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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