Patna High Court
Shayuddin @ Sayoddin @ Sadiuddin @ Shankar Singh @ RahulversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed bail to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Shayuddin, was arrested in connection with a case registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (sections 137(2), 64(1), 3(5)) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (section 4), alleging rape of a minor. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was part of a conspiracy with co‑accused Jahangir Ansari, who allegedly raped the victim, while the petitioner’s name appeared only in the co‑accused’s confessional statement and not in the victim’s statement. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to personal rivalry, highlighted the absence of any recent sexual activity in the medical report, and pointed to his prior fourteen cases under IPC section 392 as unrelated. The State opposed bail, arguing that two persons had committed rape. The court, noting the lack of substantive medical evidence linking the petitioner, the short period of custody, and the precedent of bail granted to the co‑accused, ordered bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with multiple conditions, including regular reporting to the police. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and POCSO Act.
- Whether the evidence on record (confessional statement, victim’s statement, medical report) is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent under IPC section 392 warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 3(5), 64(1)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4
Subjects
- bail
- sexual offences
- POCSO
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal antecedent
- medical evidence
- false implication
- personal rivalry
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77127 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-451 Year-2024 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran
======================================================
Shayuddin @ Sayoddin @ Sadiuddin @ Shankar Singh @ Rahul S/O Late
Nazzi Miyan, R/O Vill.- Dakshin Tola Siswa Bazar, P.S.- Kodhibhar, Dist.-
Maharajganj, U.P.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. X X X X X
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 25-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 451 of 2024
registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 137(2),
64(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.)
and Section(s) 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77127 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
2/5
3. The allegation as per the F.I.R. is to the effect
that the daughter of the informant/opposite party No. 2 is said to
have been lured by co-accused/Jahangir Ansari and he had
confined her in the house. It has been alleged that the wife of
co-accused/Jahangir Ansari, namely, Muskan Khatoon, was
instrumental in keeping the victim girl confined within the
house and co-accused/Jahangir Ansari had committed rape upon
the daughter of the informant/opposite party No. 2.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. It has been submitted that the name of the petitioner
has transpired in the confessional statement of co-
accused/Jahangir Ansari. It has further been submitted that in
the statement of the victim girl given under Section 183
B.N.S.S., she has not taken the name of the petitioner though
she has stated the name of one friend of co-accused/Jahangir
Ansari. It has next been submitted that the victim though in her
statement has stated that she has been raped by co-
accused/Jahangir Ansari and, thereafter, by his friend, but from
the medical examination report, it would be evident that the
Doctor, on examination, had found no recent sign of sexual
activity, despite the fact that the victim girl was examined within
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77127 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
3/5
24 hours of the so-called incident. It has been submitted that on
account of the same, the very allegations levelled against the
petitioner and others gets falsified. It has further been submitted
that on account of some personal rivalry between the families,
that the petitioner has also been implicated in this case.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that though the petitioner carries altogether fourteen
cases against his name, however they are all those cases where
he has been implicated in the case registered under Section 392
of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that the
petitioner is in custody since 28.07.2025. The attention of this
Court has also been drawn towards an order dated 04.07.2025,
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 87093 of 2024, whereby co-
accused/Jahangir Ansari has been granted the privilege of bail
by this Court.
6. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted
that there were two persons who had committed rape upon the
victim girl and, therefore, he does not deserve the liberty of bail.
7. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances
of the case and taking note of the fact that the medical report
does not substantiate the allegations levelled against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77127 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
4/5
petitioner as also the period of his custody, let the petitioner,
above-named, be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of
Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with
Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 451 of 2024, subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) If the petitioner, in future, is found to be
involved in similar nature of offence(s), the prosecution
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail
bond.
(v) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(vi) In view of the antecedent of the petitioner, the
petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned
Superintendent of Police within fifteen (15) days of his
release with a copy of this order and every two weeks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77127 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
5/5
thereafter for the next nine months. The conduct of the
petitioner will be kept under watch in this period by the
concerned Superintendent of Police and if it is found
wanting in any respect, a report shall be made to the Court
concerned by him to initiate a proceeding for cancellation
of bail of the petitioner for reasons of misuse of bail.
After reporting to the Superintendent of Police, a
certificate will be filed by the petitioner before the Court
concerned.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…