Patna High Court

Bunilal Kumar Ram @ Buni Lal Ram @ Chuni Lal RamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: RAJIV ROY

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted in view of the delayed complaint and the complainant’s statement under Section 183.

Summary

The petitioner, Bunilal Kumar Ram, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a rape case (sections 115 and 65 of the Bihar Penal Code) arising from a complaint filed seven months after the alleged incident. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner forcibly raped the complainant, who later made a statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner argued the act was consensual, the delay was unjustified, and he had no prior criminal record. The court noted the significant delay in filing the complaint, the complainant’s formal statement under Section 183, and the absence of any justification for the delay. Consequently, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail, directing that if the petitioner surrenders and files a bail application, the appropriate court may consider the delay and his clean record in deciding bail.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the complaint is filed after a seven‑month delay
Whether the complainant’s statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code precludes anticipatory bail

Subjects

anticipatory bail
rape
delay in filing complaint
Section 183
criminal antecedent
bail application

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21571 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2025 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Bunilal Kumar Ram @ Buni Lal Ram @ Chuni Lal Ram S/o Late Kodai Ram
                 R/o Vill- Murlipur, P.S- Taraiya, Dist- Saran

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    XXX W/o Harendra Ram R/o Taraiya, P.O.- Taraiya, P.s.- Taraiya, Distt.-
                 Saran at Chapra

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-04-2026                  Heard Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with

                   Taraiya P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025 for the offence registered under

                   sections 115 & 65 of BNS.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant alleged

                   that the petitioner entered her room and forcibly raped her. As she

                   screamed, the locals arrived and both were found in naked condition.

                   The petitioner was taken to the Police Station but no FIR was lodged.

                   Finally, she filed the complaint.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   alleged occurrence took place on 20.10.2024 at 11 AM in the

                   morning but the complaint came to be filed seven months later on
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21571 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     16.05.2025. Both are major, it was a consensual relationship but as

                     the villagers arrived, allegation of rape has come. The last

                     submission is that he do not have criminal antecedent.

                                  5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the

                     lady made statement under Section 183 of BNSS supporting the

                     occurrence.

                                  6. Having heard the parties, this Court has taken note of

                     the delay in filing the complaint as also the fact that the petitioner do

                     not have criminal antecedent and no reason has been given for filing

                     complaint after the inordinate delay of seven months save and except

                     the fact that the Police Station failed to lodge the FIR.

                                  7. However, as the lady has made statement under Section

                     183 of the BNSS, this Court do not find it appropriate to extend the

                     relief to him, which is accordingly rejected.

                                  8. If the petitioner surrenders in next four weeks and files

                     bail application, the Court concerned shall take into account the delay

                     in lodging of the complaint as also the other points which may be

                     available to the petitioner and incorporated in the bail application

                     besides the fact that he has no criminal antecedent and shall pass an

                     order preferably on the same day.



                                                    (Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…