Patna High Court
Rajiv Gupta @ Rajiv Ranjan Prakash @ Rajeev Gupta @ Rajeev Ranjan PrakashversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the FIR merely reflects a consensual relationship without a promise of marriage and therefore granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Rajiv Gupta was arrested in connection with a case alleging offences under Sections 81, 115(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023, based on a complaint by Sweta Kumari that he had a physical relationship with her and later reneged on a promise of marriage. The petitioner contended that no promise of marriage was ever made, the relationship was consensual, and the complaint was false, citing a prior withdrawn case and a retraction by the complainant and her father. The counsel argued that even if a physical relationship existed, it could not constitute rape without a promise of marriage, relying on Supreme Court precedent (Ansaar Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886). The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, while the complainant’s counsel did not appear. The court, after examining the FIR, concluded that it indicated a consensual relationship without a marriage promise and therefore granted bail to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a prima facie case of offences under the BNSS warranting denial of bail.
- Whether a consensual physical relationship without a promise of marriage can be deemed rape under the cited provisions.
- Whether the prior withdrawal and retraction of the complainant’s statements affect the credibility of the current FIR.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(2), 3(5), 482(2), 81
Subjects
- bail
- consensual relationship
- false complaint
- rape
- Section 482
- BNSS
- criminal procedure
- prima facie case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37762 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Rajiv Gupta @ Rajiv Ranjan Prakash @ Rajeev Gupta @ Rajeev Ranjan
Prakash S/O Krishna Gupta @ Kirishn Gupta@ Krishna Kumar Gupta R/O
Village- K.G. Road, Ara, P.S- Nawada, Distt.- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sweta Kumari, D/O Late Rajendra Prasad R/O Village- Jharia Bakri Haat,
P.S- Jharia, Distt.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Manish Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in
connection with Nawada (Ara) P.S. Case No. 108 of 2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 81, 115(2),
118(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita 2023.
3. As per FIR, petitioner alleged to establish physical
relationship with the informant for long four years since their
acquaintance with each other while travelling first time in train in
2021 while she was 20 years. Informant at the time of lodging FIR
was 23 years old. It is alleged that during aforesaid period
informant visited with petitioner to Dhanbad and other places and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37762 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
2/4
developed friendship, out of which physical relationship was
established, suddenly in between, the parents of petitioner fixed
his marriage somewhere else and when this matter came to
knowledge of the informant, the present false case was lodged.
4. It is submitted by Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned
senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that from the
bare perusal of FIR, it can be gathered safely on its face itself that
no promise for marriage was ever made by this petitioner before
entering into physical relationship. It is pointed out that when on
one occasion, petitioner disclosed to the informant that his
marriage was fixed by his parents, the complainant reacted in the
manner which surfaced in the form of allegation as available
through present FIR. It is submitted that the informant was so
desperate to solemnize her marriage with this petitioner that she
made an attempt to commit suicide after consuming poison in
front of the house of this petitioner, the occurrence for which
petitioner and his family forced to call the police.
5. Arguing further, it is submitted by Mr. Singh that the
informant earlier lodged a complaint case qua occurrence in
Dhanbad, which was subsequently withdrawn and, therefore,
making present FIR after four long years is only suggesting the
oblique motive of the informant. It is submitted that even
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37762 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
3/4
thereafter the father of the informant and informant herself
retracted from her own earlier version qua allegation of committing
rape.
6. It is further argued by Mr. Singh that any corporeal
relation as alleged to be established by petitioner is totally denied,
but it is submitted that presuming even there was physical
relationship which was completely consensual in nature without
any promise cannot be termed as rape. In support of his
submission, Mr. Singh submitted that the corporeal relationship
even on false pretext of marriage cannot be termed as rape and in
support of his submission he relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble
Supreme Court as available through Ansaar Mohammad Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Another reported in 2022 SCC
OnLine SC 886.
7. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
8. Learned counsel for the informant failed to join the
proceedings.
9. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as FIR itself suggest prima facie that the
informant was in consensual physical relationship with petitioner
without any promise of marriage, accordingly, above named
petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37762 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
4/4
learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is
directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at
Ara/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection with
Nawada (Ara) P.S. Case No. 108 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…