Patna High Court
Sahadat AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The bail application is dismissed; the petitioner is not entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Sahadat Ansari, applied for bail in a criminal case (PS Case No. 382 of 2024) alleging rape under Sections 64(i) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner committed rape and that his wife participated in the crime. The petitioner’s counsel argued that only three of seven witnesses had been examined and that a medical doctor’s report indicated no signs of rape. The court, citing the seriousness of the offence, the fact that trial had already commenced, and the Supreme Court’s decision in X v. State of Rajasthan (2024 SCC Online SC 3539), declined to revisit its earlier order denying bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, and the Superintendent of Police was directed to ensure attendance of the remaining witnesses, including an informant who was reportedly reluctant to prosecute. The order was communicated to the police for compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a rape case under Sections 64(i) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita given the gravity of the offence and trial status
- Whether the medical evidence and limited witness testimony affect the bail decision
- Applicability of the Supreme Court precedent in X v. State of Rajasthan to the present bail application
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 3(5), 64(i)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- witness testimony
- medical evidence
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24971 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-382 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Sahadat Ansari son of Late Kalamuddin Ansari Resident of Village- Matiyari,
Ps- Ramgarh, Dist- Kaimur (Bhabua)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Ramgarh P.S.
Case No. 382 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections
64(i), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected vide order dated 10.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 42200 of 2025.
4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
accused of committing rape with the victim. The wife of the
petitioner has also participated in the crime.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly
submits that in the trial, out of seven witnesses, three witnesses
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24971 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
2/2
have been examined. It has been submitted by learned counsel
for the petitioner that the doctor in his deposition has said that
the there is no sign of rape.
6. Considering the gravity of the offence, the fact that
the trial has already begun and in light of the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan
& Anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539, I am not
inclined to review my earlier order.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
8. The Superintendent of Police, Kaimur is directed to
ensure the attendance of the other witnesses including the
informant as it has been submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the informant, after having got married, is not
interested in prosecuting the case.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent Police, Kaimur through FAX or e-mail for its
compliance.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.