Patna High Court
Gulam Rabbani @ Gulam RabbaneeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court disposed of the pre‑arrest bail application, directing the lower court to reconsider the matter in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Naim Ahmed v. State.
Summary
The petitioner, Gulam Rabbani, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under multiple sections of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, alleging sexual exploitation of the informant's sister under the pretext of marriage. The FIR alleges that the petitioner maintained a sexual relationship with the victim since 2022 and that the victim filed a complaint only after the alleged exploitation. The petitioner’s counsel was unable to effectively argue the bail application, and the court examined the seriousness of the allegations. The bench referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Naim Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC Online SC 89, which deals with similar sexual offence allegations. In view of that precedent, the court directed the learned District Court to reconsider the bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s judgment. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the bail application without granting bail.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate approach to granting pre‑arrest bail in cases involving alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act and related provisions?
- Whether the Supreme Court’s precedent in Naim Ahmed v. State should guide the decision on bail in the present case?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- sexual offences
- POCSO Act
- Supreme Court precedent
- bail jurisprudence
- exploitation under marriage pretext
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68603 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2025 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia
======================================================
Gulam Rabbani @ Gulam Rabbanee S/O Late Md. Samim Resident of Vill.-
Parsarai, P.S.- Amour, Dist.- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Akida Khatoon W/O Md. Najim Resident of Vill.- Parsarai, P.S.- Amour,
Dist.- Purnea
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ahmad Ali, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and Mr.
Ahmad Ali, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Amour P.S. Case No. 291 of 2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 64, 76, 352,
351(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioner
had established sexual relationship with the sister of informant
on the pretext of marriage.
4. Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner is present and he is not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68603 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/2
aware of the facts of the case and has shown his inability to
argue the present bail application.
5. The bail application was heard on 24.09.2025, on
which date, case diary and medical report was called for. From
perusal of the case diary and the impugned order it appears that
on the pretext of marriage, the sister of the informant was
exploited by the petitioner sexually since the year 2022. The law
in respect of such allegation is well settled by the Apex Court in
the case of Naim Ahmed Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in
2023 SCC Online SC 89.
6. Considering the nature of allegation and admission
of the victim that she was in love relationship with the petitioner
since the year 2022 and never before the date of lodging of the
FIR, she had complained against the petitioner, learned District
Court is directed to reconsider the bail application of the
petitioner in light of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in
the case of Naim Ahmed (Supra) and pass fresh order in
accordance with law.
7. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…