Golu @ Sabir Alam @ Md. Sabir v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48656 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2024 Thana- Sahayak Khajanchi District- Purnia ====================================================== Golu @ Sabir Alam @ Md. Sabir Son of Shahzada @ Md. Shahzada R/o villLine bazar Hazaratganj (Chhoti Maszid), P.S- Sahayak Khajanchi, DistrictPurnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shabanam Praveen W/o Jamshed Alam R/o vill - Hazaratganj Chhoti Maszid, ward no. 42, P.S.- Sahayak Khajanchi, Distt.- Purnea ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 65(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 4 (2), 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. Petitioner is said to have committed wrong with the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness to the incident and the victim girl was subjected to medical examination and no spermatozoa was found and there was no sign of any sexual assault, however, the age of the victim was found between 12 to 14 years. It has further been submitted that the present case has been lodged at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48656 of 2025(5) dt.17-02-2026 2/2 the instigation of one Tutun Alam for certain oblique reasons. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 26.12.2024 with clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail on the ground that the present case involves a heinous offence with the minor girl and the victim has also supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. It has further been submitted that the charges have already been in this case and one witness has also been examined.

6. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegations and also considering that the case has been supported by the victim in her statement under Section 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S., I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected in connection Sahayak Khajanchi P.S. Case No. 366 of 2024.

7. However, in case no substantial progress is made in the trial within a period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T