Patna High Court
Md. GulzarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Gulzar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Gaighat P.S. Case No. 272 of 2024) filed under Sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 62(2) and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleging involvement in a rape of a minor. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was part of a conspiracy to bring the minor to the main accused's house where the rape occurred. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. showed he merely facilitated the meeting and that he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, contending sufficient grounds for arrest. The Court held that the facts did not warrant the grant of anticipatory bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the alleged involvement in a rape offence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 126(2), 180, 183, 351(2), 351(3), 352, 62(2), 64
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- clean antecedent
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45074 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2024 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Md. Gulzar S/o- Md. Ayub Village- Ramnagar Ps- Gaighat Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mithilesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Ratneshwar Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection
with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 272 of 2024 instituted under
Sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 62(2), 64 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the prosecution case, some accused persons
are alleged to have committed rape with the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from the statement of the victim girl recorded under Sections
180, 183 of B.N.S.S., it appears that the petitioner was
involved in bringing the girl to the house of the main accused
who has committed rape with the minor girl. Petitioner has
clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45074 of 2025(3) dt.19-02-2026
2/2
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, this is not a fit
case for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…