Patna High Court
Md. AkbarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Akbar, was charged under several sections of the BNS for allegedly intoxicating a woman, recording a sexual act, blackmailing her for money, defaming her, and assaulting her brother. The prosecution alleged that the victim’s husband was abroad and that the petitioner exploited the victim, extracting Rs.1,60,000. The petitioner argued that the FIR was lodged after a delay, the victim refused medical examination, and the dispute was essentially a monetary loan dispute arising during the COVID period. He also claimed no prior criminal record and that he had been in judicial custody since July 2025. After hearing both sides, the court found the circumstances sufficient to grant regular bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the BNS.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the victim’s refusal to undergo medical examination affect the bail decision.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal antecedents and the claim of a monetary dispute justify bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 115(2), 126(2), 318(4), 3(5), 351(2), 351(4), 352, 64
Subjects
- regular bail
- sexual assault
- blackmail
- assault
- FIR delay
- medical examination refusal
- Bihar criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8579 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- KATRA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Md. Akbar S/O Md. Jahangir R/O Village- Tehawara Tole Fakirana, P.S-
Katra, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 64, 318(4), 352, 351(2), 351(4) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
husband of the informant was working abroad for earning his
livelihood and the informant was living alone at her house with
a son of 7 years of age. It is alleged that the petitioner used to
visit her. In the year 2023, she was administered intoxicating
sweets by the petitioner and then the petitioner established
physical relationship with her and also clicked video of the act.
It is further alleged that on the basis of these videos, the
petitioner started blackmailing the victim. It is further alleged
that the petitioner has taken altogether 1 Lakh 60 Thousand
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8579 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
rupees from the informant. After this, she informed her husband.
It is further alleged that the petitioner started defaming the
informant and also called her husband regarding his relationship
with the informant. It is further alleged that on 25.04.205, when
the informant went to the petitioner for conciliating the matter, it
is alleged that the petitioner assaulted the brother of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from perusal of the FIR it is clear that the petitioner was having
relationship with her from the year 2023 and it is alleged that on
25.04.2025 the petitioner has assaulted the brother of the
informant but from perusal of the FIR it will transpire that the
FIR was lodged on 06.05.2025; after much delay. It has further
been submitted that during course of investigation it has come
that the informant has denied medical examination. It has also
come during investigation that there is dispute of cash between
the parties. Both parties have alleged that they have advanced
cash to each other. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that actually the informant has taken loan from him
during course of CORONA and as the petitioner started
demanding the cash advanced to her, she has filed this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8579 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 19.07.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the bail.
6. As the informant is not ready for medical
examination, it goes to show that the allegations regarding
sexual intercourse with the petitioner is false.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 785 of 2025 arising out of Katra P.S. Case
No. 108 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Court no.-III,
Muzaffarpur.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…