Patna High Court

Anzar AhmadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 March 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Anzar Ahmad, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS‑318/2024) involving multiple IPC offences including rape, assault and criminal intimidation. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner had a physical relationship with the informant based on a false promise of marriage, recorded a video, and caused a miscarriage by administering medicine. The petitioner denied any relationship or wrongdoing, claimed innocence, and highlighted lack of criminal antecedents and a pending compromise petition by the informant against another person. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the rape allegation. The court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender and seek regular bail before the trial court.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the alleged rape and related offences under the IPC
Whether the seriousness of the allegations and the nature of the offences preclude the grant of anticipatory bail
Whether the petitioner’s claim of no criminal antecedent affects the bail decision

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 313, 323, 341, 354(B), 376, 379, 504, 506/34

Subjects

anticipatory bail
rape
false promise of marriage
IPC
bail
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18067 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-318 Year-2024 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Anzar Ahmad Son of Md. Mushtaq Resident of Village - Budhanagar, P.S.-
                 Nanpur, District - Sitamarhi
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Noushad Khan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-03-2026                 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

                   for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                              2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been

                   filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection

                   with Nanpur P.S. Case no. 318 of 2024 instituted for the

                   offence under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 376, 313, 379, 504,

                   506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                              3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner has established a physical relationship with the

                   informant on the false promise of marriage. It is further alleged

                   that a video was also made of the act and when she got

                   pregnant, she was promised marriage. It is alleged that she was

                   administered medicine, due to which a miscarriage took place.

                   The informant is a divorced lady.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18067 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                            2/3




                        4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this

          case. He also submits that no such occurrence has taken place

          and the petitioner got no such relationship with the informant.

          He further submits that the informant has filed an affidavit

          which goes to show that he has also filed a case against Md.

          Faisal and in that case, he has filed a compromise petition.

          Moreover, a statement has been made in para-3 of this petition

          that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

                     5. In contra, learned APP appearing for the State and

          learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of

          bail of the petitioner.

                      6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the fact that there is an allegation against the

          petitioner of committing rape with the informant on the false

          promise of marriage, this court is not inclined to grant

          privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and as such, his

          prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

                       7. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender

          before the trial Court and pray for regular bail, the same shall

          be considered by the trial Court, without being prejudiced by
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18067 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     this order of rejection.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…