IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76523 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2024 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Wasim Akram @ Wasim Alam @ Washim Akaram @ Washim Alam S/O Md. Reyaj @Md. Reyaj Alam R/O Village- Kritpur Shahnagar, P.S- Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Vashisht Rai S/O Bharat Rai R/O Village- Raghunathpur, Panchayat, Uttari Noniya, Ward No. 10, P.S- Paharpur, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr . Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 4 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 572 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections137(2) and 96 of B.N.S. 3. The case of the prosecution is that the minor daughter of the informant was missing from 17.12.2024. It is alleged that the mobile number of the informant was also switched off. During investigation, the victim was recovered and she has given her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS. In her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, she has stated that the petitioner has got any how Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76523 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026 2/3 the mobile number of the victim. He called her and she started talking with him. She fled from the house of the petitioner and from there, she went to Bikaner, Rajasthan with the petitioner. She solemnized nikah with the petitioner and started living with him. In her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, she has stated that the petitioner has enticed her and has committed “galat kaam” with her. She kept with him for six months at the house of Hamid Mian and she returned from there on her own. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has further submitted that the statement under Section 180 of BNSS is the previous statement whereas the statement under Section 183 of BNSS is later statement of the victim. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 18.06.2025. 5. Countering this, learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of regular bail and has submitted that under new provisions of BNSS while recording the statement of the statement under Section 180 of BNSS, videography of the same has to be conducted by the I.O. but as the I.O. has not conducted the videography, there is no sanctity Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76523 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026 3/3 of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of BNSS. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact and circumstances of this case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected. 7. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded. Shubham/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T