Patna High Court
Md. Faij Khan @ Faij KhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail as he has made out a prima facie case, following the precedent set in Naim Ahmed v. State.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Faij Khan, a 19‑year‑old, was implicated in a FIR alleging that he established a physical relationship with the informant under the pretext of marriage, leading to charges under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the Bihar Penal Code. He applied for pre‑arrest bail, asserting that the relationship was consensual, both parties were adults, and he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Naim Ahmed v. State (2023), found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for bail and directed his release on pre‑arrest bail with a bond and sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code. The Court also ordered the District Court to verify the petitioner’s criminal record and to refer the matter to mediation under the guidelines of the Naim Ahmed case.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to the petitioner charged under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the Bihar Penal Code.
- Whether the petitioner has established a prima facie case for bail under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether mediation is appropriate in a case arising from a consensual relationship alleged in the FIR.
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- consensual relationship
- criminal law
- Section 69
- Section 115(2)
- Section 352
- Section 351(2)
- mediation
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15131 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2025 Thana- Araria Sangram District- Madhubani
======================================================
Md. Faij Khan @ Faij Khan, aged about 19 years, Male, S/o Md. Smasher
Khan R/o -Sohpur , P.s- Araria Sangram, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Momina Khatoon D/o Kayum Khan R/o vill - Sohpura, P.S.- Araria,
Sangaram, Distt.- Madhubani
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Arariya Sangram P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025 registered for
the offence(s) punishable under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and
351(2) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
petitioner on the pretext of marriage established physical
relationship with the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. From perusal of the FIR, it
is apparent that both parties were in relationship for quite some
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15131 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
time and enjoyed each other’s company for years together and
when the relationship developed, both the parties were major.
The relationship was consensual. In this regard, he has placed
reliance upon a judgment of the Apex Court in case of Naim
Ahmed Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in 2023 SCC
Online SC 89. Petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant and learned APP appearing on behalf of State
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR, it is evident that the petitioner and informant
were in relationship for quite some time and enjoyed each
other’s company for years together and when their relationship
deteriorated, the informant lodged the present FIR. In light of
law laid down by the Apex Court in case of Naim Ahmed
(Supra), I am of the opinion that the petitioner has prima facie
made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15131 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is
pending, in connection with Arariya Sangram P.S. Case No. 55
of of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
9. Learned District Court is further directed to
examine the matter for mediation in light of the law laid down
by the Apex Court in the case of Naim Ahmed (Supra) and take
necessary steps to issue notices to the respective parties and
upon their appearance, refer the matter before the learned
Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for
appearance of the parties to give effect to Mediation 2.0.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.