Dismissed¶¶25

Md Mubarak v. The State of Bihar

Bail rejected – Penetrative sexual assault on minor girl (aged about 16 years)

Patna HC9 Dec 2025CR. MISC./60622/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court Criminal Miscellaneous No.60622 of 2025, order dated 09-12-2025, Chandra Shekhar Jha, J. Bail application rejected under Section 64 BNS Act and Sections 4 and 6 POCSO Act; Piyar P.S. Case No. 93 of 2025, Muzaffarpur; penetrative sexual assault on girl aged about 16 years on 21.06.2025; accused in custody since 23.06.2025; named in FIR; charge-sheet submitted; medical report prima facie supportive of assault; informant absent despite service; trial to be concluded within Section 35(2) POCSO time limit.

What did the court decide?

Taking note of the victim's medical report, which prima facie suggests that the penetrative sexual assault as alleged was committed upon her, the petitioner's prayer for bail stands rejected. ¶¶25

Md Mubarak Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60622 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2025 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

====================================================== Md. Mubarak Son of Md Akbar, Resident of Village - Boariya, P.S. -Sakra, Dist. - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar.

¶6

Nurjaha Khatoon wife of Md. Akub R/o Village - Govindpur, P.S. - Piyar, Dist. - Muzaffarpur.

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

======================================================

¶9

Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP

¶11

======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 09-12-2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Piyar P.S. Case No. 93 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 64 of the BNS Act and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶16

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 23.06.2025.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit penetrative sexual assault upon daughter of the informant aged about 16 years while she was washing cloth in her courtyard on 21.06.2025 at about 2:00 PM.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60622 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 2/3

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶20

the petitioner submitted that the petitioner implicated with present case out of neighbourhood disputes and differences. It is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, for which charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.

¶21

Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that even at the time of medical examination, the frequent bleeding was noticed from the private part of the victim. It is also pointed out that scratch mark on breast and multiple parallel line mark with redness were found all over the body particularly, on lower limbs, suggesting that how badly victim was ravished during the occurrence.

¶22

Despite of valid service, none appeared on behalf of the informant/opposite party no. 2 to join present pending proceeding.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of medical report

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60622 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 3/3

¶25

of victim which prima facie suggest that penetrative sexual assault as alleged was committed upon her, accordingly, the prayer of bail of petitioner stands rejected.

¶26

The learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial within the time limit as provisioned under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act.

¶27

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶28

veena/-

¶29

U T

Md Mubarak v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Mubarak v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Sharma @ Naveen Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Singh @ Alok Kumar Singh @ Putul Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mintu Mukhiya @ Mantu Mukhiya @ Mantu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shivam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prahlad Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anwar Miya @ Anwar Ansari Vs The State of Bihar