Patna High Court
Vaseem Nadaf @ Wasim NadafversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the allegations constitute rape and are supported by DNA evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Vaseem Nadaf, was charged under Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly raping Najbin Khatoon by falsely promising marriage, resulting in a child. The petitioner argued that the complaint was filed more than two years after the alleged incident and that a relationship based on a false marriage promise cannot constitute rape, citing Supreme Court precedents. The State opposed anticipatory bail, presenting a DNA report confirming the petitioner as the biological father of the child, indicating a pre‑meditated deception. The court examined the timeliness of the FIR, the nature of the alleged act, and the DNA evidence. Concluding that the DNA evidence substantiated the allegations and that the act fell within the definition of rape, the court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the alleged sexual intercourse under a false pretext of marriage amounts to rape under Section 376 IPC.
- Whether the delay of more than two years in filing the FIR bars the prosecution.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the DNA evidence and the nature of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 376, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- false pretext of marriage
- DNA evidence
- IPC sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506, 34
- FIR delay
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27324 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-457 Year-2024 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Vaseem Nadaf @ Wasim Nadaf Son of Md. Janir Nadaf village - Bela
Bahadurpur, P.S. - Nanpur, Dist. - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Najbin Khatoon @ Najnin Khatoon Wife of Md. Meraj village - Bela
Bahadurpur, P.S. - Nanpur, Dist. - Sitamarhi
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State duly assisted by learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case
No. 457 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit
rape upon the informant/O.P. No. 2 on false pretext of
marriage. It is further alleged that opposite party no. 2
becomes pregnant out of said relationship and gave birth to a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27324 of 2025(5) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
male child namely, Md. Ahan.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner that present case was lodged falsely after more
than two years of the alleged occurrence. It is pointed out that
allegation qua sexual assault on the basis of false pretext of
marriage was raised in the year 2022-23, however, the FIR in
issue was lodged on 09.09.2024.
5. Arguing further, it is submitted that any corporeal
relations as established on the false pretext of marriage
cannot be termed as rape and in support of his submission,
learned counsel relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme
Court as available through Ansaar Mohammad Vs. State of
Rajasthan and others reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 886
and also Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of
Maharashtra & Anr. reported in (2019) 9 SCC 608.
6. While concluding argument, learned counsel
submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State duly assisted by
learned counsel for the informant/O.P. No.2, while opposing
the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submitted that
allegation qua sexual assault on the basis of false pretext of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27324 of 2025(5) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
marriage was available specifically against this petitioner. It is
submitted that DNA report confirms that petitioner is the
biological father of the child namely, Md. Ahan. It is further
submitted that the marriage appears not solemnized with the
informant/O.P. No.2 suggesting that petitioner was under
intention to cheat informant from very inception of
establishing physical relationship.
8. In view of aforesaid and by taking note of the fact
as DNA report confirms that petitioner is the biological father
of the born child namely, Md. Ahan out of alleged physical
relationship, accordingly, prayer of anticipatory bail of the
petitioner stands rejected for the present.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…