Md. Minhaj Mansuri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73000 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-157 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Md. Minhaj Mansuri S/O Md. Moin Mansuri @ Md. Moeen Mansuri R/O vill.-Pratapnagar, Ward No.-10, P.S- Chhatapur, Dist.-Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Md. Giyasuddin S/O Late Kamruddin R/O vill.- Madhopur, Ward No.-05, P.S- Chhatanpur, Dist.-Supaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary For the Informant Mr. Arun ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 8 and 17 of the POCSO Act.

3. Petitioner is said to have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant and committed rape with her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case as there was some confusion with regard to marriage between the parties. However, for an incident which is said to have taken place on 07.05.2025, the FIR was lodged after an inordinate delay on 18.05.2025 for which no plausible explanation was tendered. It is further submitted that the medical report also did not indicate any

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73000 of 2025(4) dt.11-03-2026 2/2 evidence of sexual assault and during trial the witness has already been examined as prosecution witness no. 1 in the trial and she has not supported the case of the prosecution and has rather stated that she had filed this case at the instance of the villagers and that no rape was committed upon her. A certified copy of her deposition has been made available which is kept on record. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 27.05.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for bail but they are not in a position to controvert the fact that the victim has not supported the case of the prosecution.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and especially considering the fact that the victim herself has not supported the prosecution case during the trial, let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 157 of 2025, subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall appear on each and every date till conclusion of trial.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T