Patna High Court
Md. Munajir @ Md Munajid @ Munazir Alam @ Monazir AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, finding the allegations serious and the evidence sufficient to justify continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Munajir, was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he, along with others, abducted and sexually assaulted a 14‑year‑old girl, the informant’s daughter, on 14 August 2025. The girl later recovered enough to state that she was forced into a white car, blindfolded, and assaulted. The petitioner sought regular bail, claiming innocence, lack of criminal antecedent, and that the charge‑sheet was filed after a 14‑day delay. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on the medico‑legal report indicating a torn hymen and the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the evidence of sexual assault, and the delay, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged kidnapping and rape of a minor.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the presence of medico‑legal evidence affect the bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 137(2), 3(5), 74
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- rape
- minor
- medico‑legal report
- delay in FIR
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78570 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2025 Thana- SIMRAHA District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Munajir @ Md Munajid @ Munazir Alam @ Monazir Alam Son of Md.
alam @ Md. Alimuddin R/o Village - Bokra, Ward no. 7, P.S. - Simraha, Dist.
- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X Wife of Md. Mojahid Alam R/o Village - Haldiya Bokra, Ward no. 05, P.S.
- Simraha, Dist. - Araria.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sachina, Advocate
Mr. Shashwat, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Simraha P.S. Case No. 213 of 2025 dated 03.09.2025, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 126(2),
115(2), 109, 74 and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per allegation a 14 years’ old daughter of the
informant had gone to a shop to purchase Tiranga Jhanda for
the occasion of independence day, but she could not return to
her home. Efforts to search the daughter went in vain. On the
next date, she was found in unconscious condition near the
baswari (cluster of bamboos) at the distance of 300 metres from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78570 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
her home. Thereafter, she was taken to her home and got
admitted in Sadar Hospital, Araria. In the course of treatment,
she regained consciousness for some time and stated to her
father that when she was on way to the shop to buy the flag, the
accused petitioner along with other persons came in a white
colour car and she was forcibly lifted into that car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that as per the allegation, the
occurrence had taken place on 14th of August, 2025, whereas the
case has been reported to the police on 28.08.2025 i.e. after 14
days of the occurrence. He further submits that as per the
medico-legal examination, the alleged offence is not supported
and not only charge-sheet has been submitted, but even charge
has been framed in this case.
5. He further submits that the petitioner has been
languishing in jail since 04.09.2025.
6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier
either for anticipatory bail or regular one.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78570 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
8. However, learned APP for the State and learned
counsel for the Informant vehemently oppose the prayer of the
petitioner for bail submitting that the alleged offence is very
heinous in nature and the minor daughter of the informant has
been sexually assaulted by the petitioner. They refer to medico-
legal examination report made by G.M.C.H., Purnea as per
which, it has been clearly stated that hymen of the victim was
torn. They also refer to the statement of the victim as made
under Section 183 of BNSS in which she has clearly stated that
when she was on way to the shop, one car came to her wherein
she was forcibly got seated and bandage was put on her eye and
5-6 persons were sitting in that car, including the petitioner and
her mouth was also closed by some bandage and she was taken
to unknown place. She got unconscious in course of rape by the
one and thereafter, she was unaware of the subsequent
development.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and nature of the alleged offence and material on record, I am
not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on regular and
accordingly, it is hereby rejected.
(Jitendra Kumar, J)
shoaib/-
U T
Checking your session…