Patna High Court
Md. Safi AkhtarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Safi Akhtar, was named in an FIR alleging rape under Section 64(1) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, based on a false promise of marriage and a threat to make private photographs and videos viral. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the alleged consent was obtained deceitfully and that no actual viral dissemination occurred, citing Supreme Court precedents that a consensual relationship under a marriage promise does not constitute rape. The State opposed the bail, maintaining the seriousness of the allegations. The court examined the prima facie nature of the rape allegation, noted the petitioner's clean antecedent, and found the threat to make media viral doubtful. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of rape under false promise of marriage and threat to publish intimate media.
- Whether the alleged threat to make photographs/videos viral renders the FIR prima facie sufficient for denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351(2), 351(3), 64(1)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- false promise of marriage
- threat to publish intimate images
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41988 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Md. Safi Akhtar S/O Shamim Akhtar R/O Bakiya Sukhai @ Bakiya Diyara,
PS- Barari, Distt- Katihar
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Barari P.S. Case No.
312 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 64(1), 351(2), 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita,
2023 (in short, the ‘B.N.S.’).
3. As per FIR, petitioner, who is aged about 25 years
alleged to commit rape upon the informant aged about 18 years
old on first instance and, thereafter, on several occasion, on the
false pretext of marriage, but finally he solemnized marriage
with another girl. It is alleged that petitioner threatened the
informant to make the photos/videos viral, which were captured
for their private moments.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41988 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
2/3
submitted that allegation as raised through present FIR
maximum suggest that consent of the informant was obtained by
deceitful means and therefore, lodging of FIR for the offences
punishable under section 64 of the B.N.S. for the offence of rape
is not convincing under the law.
5. It is pointed out that impugned order suggest that
naked photographs of the victim made viral on Instagram on
04.09.2025, but the FIR, which was lodged on 06.10.2025
suggest only that a threat was advanced to make video/photo
viral, suggesting sufficiently that till the date of lodging FIR, no
such allegation was available to make the video/photo viral,
making the allegation doubtful on its face.
6. Arguing further, it is submitted that corporeal
relationship against the promise of marriage cannot be termed as
rape and in support of this 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. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41988 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
3/3
8. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as prima facie allegation of rape appears
raised against the petitioner in the background of false promise
of marriage, where allegation to make the video/photo viral is
also appearing doubtful, as discussed aforesaid, accordingly,
above-named petitioner, who is a man of clean antecedent, in
the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks
from this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing
of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar/concerned court in
connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 312 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
(in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.