Patna High Court
Md. Iliyas @ IlliyasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The bail application is disposed as there is no present apprehension of arrest, though the petitioners may apply for anticipatory bail if circumstances change.
Summary
The petitioners, Md. Iliyas and Md. Lutan, sought relief fearing arrest in a rape case (Amarpur PS Case No. 738 of 2025) filed under Sections 64 and 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The FIR named three accused, including their relative Md. Guddu, and alleged that the petitioners threatened the informant to deter filing a complaint. The petitioners contended they were innocent, with no direct allegation against petitioner No.1 and only an assault allegation against petitioner No.2. The State opposed bail, citing a final police report favouring the petitioners but noting the co‑accused was already in custody. The Court examined the case diary and victim’s statement, found no specific charge against petitioner No.1 and only an assault allegation against petitioner No.2, and noted the final report was in favour of the petitioners, concluding there was no present apprehension of arrest. Consequently, the bail application was disposed, with the court indicating the petitioners could seek anticipatory bail if future circumstances arise.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail or anticipatory bail in the rape case under the BNS, 2023 and POCSO Act.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioners justify their arrest.
- Effect of the final police report submitted in favour of the petitioners on the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 351(2), 64
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 4
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- POCSO Act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 64
- Section 351(2)
- Section 4
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23354 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-738 Year-2025 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
1. Md. Iliyas @ Illiyas S/o Md. Lutan Resident Of Village- Datwati, Ps-
Amarpur, Dist- Banka
2. Md. Lutan S/o Late Md. Samid Resident Of Village- Datwati, Ps- Amarpur,
Dist- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. B Wife of Z R/o vill - Chichroun, P.S.- Akbarnagar, Distt.- Bhagalpur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saurabh Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 01-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State. No one appears on behalf of Opposite Party
No. 2, in spite of the fact that notice has been served upon
Opposite Party No. 2, who has filed his Vakalatnama.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 738 of 2025, dated
24.07.2025, lodged under Sections 64 & 351(2) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”)
and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged
against three named accused persons, including the present
petitioners, alleging that the co-accused, namely, Md. Guddu,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23354 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026
2/3
committed rape upon the informant's daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel further submits that the petitioners are the brother and
father of Md. Guddu. Counsel further submits that the only
specific allegation against the present petitioners is that, when
the informant visited them regarding the said incident, they
abused and threatened her not to file a criminal case, otherwise
they would kill her. Counsel further submits that, on the
previous occasion, the case diary was called for. Counsel further
submits that the criminal antecedent of petitioner No. 1 is clean.
However, one criminal case is pending against petitioner No. 2.
Counsel further submits that the names of the petitioners have
figured in this case solely for the reason that they are the brother
and father of the main accused, against whom there is a heinous
allegation. Counsel also submits that the petitioners are ready to
fulfill all the conditions whatsoever that may be imposed upon
them.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand,
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that
the case diary was called for, and from the case diary, it
transpires that the police have submitted a final form in favour
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23354 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026
3/3
of the present petitioners. So far as the co-accused against
whom there is a direct allegation is concerned, he is already in
custody.
6. Upon perusal of the case diary and the statement of
the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it transpires
to this Court that the specific allegation is against the co-
accused, namely, Md. Guddu, and against the present petitioner
No. 1, there is no allegation. However, against petitioner No. 2,
there is an allegation of assault.
7. From the final report, it transpires that the final
form has been submitted in favour of the petitioners, and as
such, there is no apprehension of arrest. However, as and when
any situation arises in future giving rise to apprehension of
arrest, the petitioners shall be at liberty to move an application
for anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, the present bail application stands
disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.