Wajid Asif v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2044 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2024 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Wajid Asif son of Mansur Ansari VILLAGE- MAHUAWA MADARSA POLICE STATION -JAGDISHPUR DISTRICT -WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Roshani Kumari Daughter of Rajan Mishra Village - Budhaul, P.S - Bodhgaya, District - Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sarvesh Kashyap, Adv.
For the State :
Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 41 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 328, 376, 379, 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the IT Act.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant alleged that the petitioner Wajid Asif, a friend of her brother, called her to a park, intoxicated her through a Mazza drink and took her to a room and established physical relations while recording a video and taking photos. He later created a fake Facebook ID using her photo, threatened her, snatched her mobile and ornaments and circulated her video and photos on social media.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2044 of 2025(7) dt.14-10-2025 2/2 though the relationship between the petitioner and the victim existed since the victim's minority, she has now attained majority and the relationship between the petitioner and the victim is consensual. He has further submitted that no objectionable material has been posted by the petitioner on Facebook.
5. On the other hand, Sri J.N. Thakur, learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim, in her statement, has supported the allegation.
6. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail, which is hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T