Patna High Court

Gopal MaharajversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Summary

The petitioner, Gopal Maharaj, was charged under Sections 81, 69 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly persuading a woman to obtain a divorce by promising marriage, subsequently engaging in a year‑long consensual relationship and then refusing to marry her. The petitioner contended that the FIR was fabricated, the relationship was between consenting adults, and no coercion or false promise was involved. The State opposed the bail application. The court, considering the clean antecedent of the petitioner and the nature of the allegations, granted anticipatory bail, directing that if arrested within eight weeks the petitioner be released on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the allegations of false FIR and alleged sexual offences.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 3(5), 69, 81

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false FIR
consensual relationship
sexual offences
bail conditions
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23691 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Katihar
                 ======================================================
                 Gopal Maharaj S/O Vijay Kumar Maharaj R/O Vill.- Harishankar Nayak High
                 School, P.S- Sahyak, Dist- Katihar
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for

                   the offences punishable under Sections 81, 69, 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. As per F.I.R., this petitioner persuaded informant to

                   obtain divorce from her hear husband, alluring her that

                   petitioner would solemnize marriage with her. Petitioner

                   established physical relation with the informant for about one

                   year and thereafter, refused to marry and got engaged

                   somewhere else.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   entire case as set out in the F.I.R. is false and concocted.

                   Informant was major when the relationship developed between

                   the parties and was fully aware of the consequences of such

                   relationship which continued for about one year. He further
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23691 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      submits that acts of repeated intimacy and sexual relationship

                      was consensual in nature and was not established under any

                      false promise, threat or coercion and such, the same cannot be

                      said to be induced or involuntary. As a matter of fact, it is a case

                      of prolonged love affair between two consenting adults which

                      has been given a colour of forcible sexual intercourse with

                      oblique purpose and motive. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                      the bail application.

                                   6. Considering backdrop of the case, nature of

                      accusation and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed

                      and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event

                      of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of

                      eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-

                      bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like

                      amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional

                      Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with Mahila P. S.

                      Case No. 38 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under

                      Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…