Md. Yasin @ Yasin v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84010 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Yasin @ Yasin S/o Late Sahidul @ Late Safidur Rahman R/o vill - Jhamta Ward no. 9, P.s. - Tarabari, Distt.- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate Mr. Kumar Uday Bhanu Roy, Advocate Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 15-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner who is father-in-law of the informant, has committed rape with her. It is further alleged that due to that intercourse, she got pregnant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this case, DNA test of the dead child and the petitioner was conducted. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84010 of 2025(2) dt.15-12-2025 2/2 FSL report is annexed as P/4 at page 26. The FSL report reads as follows:- the source of exhibit marked-C (Source-blood sample of Md. Yasin) is found excluded as Biological father of the source of exhibit marked-A( source blood sample of dead child). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been implicated in this case only for property. The allegations are without any basis. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 26.09.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Araria. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Shubham/- U T