Nursad Miya @ Nurshad Mian @ Nurshad Alam v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RUDRA PRAKASH
Outcome
Bail granted
Let the petitioner be released on bail on
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ss. 8, 12
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 164
Judgment
The State of Bihar
Gorakh Thakur S/O Late Vikram Thakur R/O Village- Sukhlahi, P.S- Mainatand, Distt.- West Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : : For the Petitioner/s For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Advocate Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ORAL ORDER 5 20-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 366A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 & 12 of the POCSO Act.
Prosecution case in short is that on 29-02-2024, the informant’ daughter went missing, while he was at work, and later, it was learnt that petitioner had allegedly kidnapped her.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 30-07-2024. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83395 of 2024(5) dt.20-02-2025 paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no eye witness to the occurrence. Victim has refused for her medical examination. From perusal of statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. it would reveal that there is no allegation of sexual intercourse on the petitioner. It is submitted that police after completion of investigation has submitted charge sheet in this case.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Other witness have supported the prosecution case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and charge sheet being submitted, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Operative part
Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024, subject to the following conditions: Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83395 of 2024(5) dt.20-02-2025 (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner. (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Let the petitioner be released on bail on
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 366A; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss. 8, 12; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.