Patna High Court
Sami AkhtarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail is denied as there is no new ground and the case remains at the prosecution‑evidence stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Sami Akhtar, was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 64, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act. He filed a second bail application after his earlier bail plea was rejected, claiming he has been in judicial custody since 26‑10‑2024 without any criminal antecedent and that no witness has yet been examined. The trial is currently at the prosecution‑evidence stage, with seven charge‑sheeted witnesses summoned but none having appeared, and the court was informed that the trial could be concluded within six months if both sides cooperate. The State opposed the bail, arguing there is no new ground to revisit the earlier decision. The High Court held that the absence of any new material or change in circumstances does not merit granting bail and therefore rejected the petition. The court also directed the lower court to expedite the trial and aim for completion within six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted at the prosecution‑evidence stage when no witness testimony has been taken
- Whether the petitioner has raised any new ground justifying a fresh consideration of bail
- Whether continued detention without trial violates the petitioner’s right to speedy trial
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 64
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- prosecution evidence stage
- POCSO Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- custodial detention
- expedited trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85879 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA PS District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sami Akhtar S/O Sheikh Jamil Akhtar @ Jameel Akhtar R/o Village-
Lakhaura, Bichla Tola P.S.- Lakhaura, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X S/O Late SK. Sakir Hussain R/o Village- Lakhaura, Bichla Tola P.S.-
Lakhaura, District- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Asif Kalim, Advocate
Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila
P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, instituted for the offences under
Sections 64, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
24.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 88111 of 2024 taking into
consideration the statement of the victim recorded under Section
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85879 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
183 of BNSS and nature and gravity of the offence.
4. In compliance of the order dated 12.12.2025, a
report dated 12.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that the case is fixed at the stage of prosecution
evidence. There are total seven charge-sheeted witnesses in this
case and process of Summon has already been issued against
them but not a single witness has turned up for their evidence. It
is further reported that if the the prosecution and defence co-
operates, the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six
months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 26.10.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. It is further submitted that charge has already been
framed against the petitioner on 09.10.2025 and no any witness
has been examined in this case.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
case is fixed at the stage of prosecution evidence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85879 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a
period of six months from today.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…