Nasim Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66545 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2024 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Rohtas ====================================================== Nasim Alam S/o Haji Hussain Ansari R/o vill - Murarpur, P.S.- Harsiddhi, Distt.- Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Mukul Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 66(E) and 67 of the I.T. 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 25.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 84299 of 2024 considering the direct allegation against the petitioner. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 12.09.2025, a report dated 24.09.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66545 of 2025(3) dt.31-10-2025 2/2 appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner in this case on 19.05.2025. It is further reported that out of six chargesheeted witnesses, no any witness has been examined in this case and the trial is likely to be concluded within 11⁄2 years. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 30.07.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal antecedent.

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.

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 expeditiously. If the trial is not concluded within the period of four months, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T