Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was refused.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Alam, a teacher, was accused of taking Rs. 5,50,000 from an informant on a promise to return it, and subsequently raping her, photographing the act, and threatening to release the images. The case was registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, with the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence and a clean antecedent, while the informant opposed the bail, citing the victim's statement. The court examined the seriousness of the allegations and the victim's recorded statement. Considering the nature of the accusations, the court refused the anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the allegations of rape, extortion and threats under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Whether the victim's statement under Section 183 BNSS warrants denial of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • rape
  • extortion
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Section 183 BNSS
  • criminal procedure
  • sexual offences

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84517 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- KORHA District- Katihar
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Alam S/o Abdul Rajjak Resident of - Mantu Chowk, Muslim Tola, P.S -
                 Barari, District - Katihar

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, A.P.P.
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Bhola Prasad, Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocates
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   17-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant

                   and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Korha P. S. Case

                   No. 183 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 316(2), 318(4), 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. It is alleged that this petitioner, who was a Teacher

                   in the same school in which children of the informant were

                   studying, came in contact with the informant, became friends

                   and took Rs. 5,50,000/- on an assurance of returning the same

                   after one month. After one month, when informant demanded

                   her money, petitioner called her in a hotel and thereafter

                   committed her rape, took photos of the incident and threatened

                   to viral them, if she disclosed the ordeal to anyone.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84517 of 2025(5) dt.17-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                                     4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                        petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner

                        has falsely been implicated in this case with an ulterior motive.

                        Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                                     5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently

                        opposed the bail application and submitted that victim in her

                        statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has supported the

                        prosecution case.

                                     6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement

                        of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, prayer for

                        anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

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.