Akhilesh SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14843 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Akhilesh Singh S/o- Late Murli Singh @ Murlidhar Singh R/v- Dharhara
                 ward 8 Ps- Chausa Dist- Madhepura
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner
                                                  Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     XXX W/o- YYY R/v- Dharhara ward 8 Ps- Chausa Dist- Madhepura
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Dinesh Prasad Verma, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Lalan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   02-07-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                             2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No.

                   148 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 115(2), 127(2), 76, 64, 308(5), 352, 351(2) & 3(5) of

                   the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the ‘B.N.S.’) and

                   Sections 66(c), 66(E), 67, 67B of the I.T. Act and Section 8/12

                   of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional

                   Sessions       Judge-VI-cum-Special           Judge,       POCSO         Court,

                   Madhepura.

                             3. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit

                   sexual assault upon the minor daughter of the informant aged

                   about 17 years.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14843 of 2026(4) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/3




                   4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

          submitted that the informant lodged a case against the petitioner

          and his family members on 20.01.2025, therefore, the present

          false case was lodged making instrumental the minor daughter

          of the informant.

                   5. It is submitted that there is major contradiction

          between the allegation as raised through complaint petition and

          the statement of victim as recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S. It is submitted that there is delay of about 22 days as to

          lodge the complaint case on the basis of which the present FIR

          was lodged on 02.06.2025. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.

                   6. Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the

          prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submitted that from

          perusal of complaint petition, it transpires that the occurrence

          took place between 12.01.2025 to 31.01.2025, and, therefore,

          the last date of occurrence, in view of complaint petition, is

          31.01.2025, thereafter, the petitioner lodged this complaint case

          on 04.02.2025, for the reason that before ten days, on the

          ground of false allegation, the petitioner’s side lodged a case,

          which was registered as Chausa P.S. Case No. 22/2025 dated

          20.01.2025, and, therefore, the complainant has genuine

          apprehension of arrest, if approaching to police.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14843 of 2026(4) dt.02-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                              7. It is submitted by learned A.P.P. that delay is

                     effectively for only three days from the last date of occurrence

                     and not 22 days, as submitted by learned counsel for the

                     petitioner. It is further submitted that during the investigation,

                     statement of victim was recorded under Section 183 of the

                     B.N.S.S., where she categorically stated that this petitioner

                     came in the night and gagged her mouth by cloth and pulled her

                     forcibly to the cattle-shed and thereafter captured her nude

                     photographs/videos and uploaded the same on social media like

                     Facebook and Instragram.

                              8. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by

                     taking note of the fact as the victim specifically alleged this

                     petitioner to commit sexual assault upon her and also to capture

                     her nude photographs/videos during the occurrence while

                     recording her statement under section 183 of the B.N.S.S.,

                     accordingly, prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands

                     rejected.


                                                                   (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-

U      T