Patna High Court
Rashida KhatoonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and the appellants are granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Rashida Khatoon and Muskan Praveen, appealed against the district judge’s order rejecting their anticipatory bail in a case involving the alleged disappearance of a 17‑year‑old girl and alleged caste‑based harassment. The prosecution alleged that the girl was threatened with forced marriage and that the informant’s caste name was used by the accused’s family. The appellants contended they were falsely implicated, highlighted a 34‑day delay in filing the FIR, and argued that no specific allegation or public caste insult was made against them. The High Court observed the absence of direct material against the appellants and the significant FIR delay, concluding that the bail application warranted relief. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order and granted anticipatory bail with conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the 34‑day delay in lodging the FIR and lack of specific allegations justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged conduct constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 96
- SC/ST Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR delay
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
- caste harassment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2147 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-541 Year-2024 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad
======================================================
1. Rashida Khatoon W/o Md. Amzad @ Md. Amjad Resident of village
Shekhpura, P.S.- Ghosi, District-Jehanabad
2. Muskan Praveen D/o Md. Amzad @ Md. Amjad Resident of village
Shekhpura, P.S.- Ghosi, District-Jehanabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ranju Devi W/o Bablu Mochi Resident of village Shekhpura, P.S.- Ghosi,
District-Jehanabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Md Ataul Haque, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Shubhankar Raj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the order dated 01.05.2025 passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO,
Jehanabad whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
appellants in connection with Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 541 of 2024
under Sections 137(2), 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2147 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant
alleges that his 17-year-old daughter went to appear in Inter
examination on 27.09.2024 but did not return and could not be
traced. It is further alleged that co-villager Md. Arwaz had been
threatening to marry her, and upon inquiry at his house, his
family members abused the informant by taking caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have falsely been implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of thirty-
four days in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation,
which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned
counsel further submitted that from perusal of the FIR itself, it
appears that there is no specific allegation against the appellants
rather, only general and omnibus allegation has been made
against them. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits
that the appellants have not taken the caste name of the
informant in public view, hence, no offence under the provisions
of SC/ST Act is made out against him. The appellants have no
intention to disgrace the image of the informant in public view.
The appellants have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2147 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
appellants.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, there being no direct material against the appellants
as also there being a considerable delay of thirty four days in
lodging the FIR, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 01.05.2025
passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VI-
cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Jehanabad in connection with
Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 541 of 2024 is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellants above named, in the event of
arrest/surrender before the learned Court below within a period
of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Ghoshi P.S.
Case No. 541 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…