Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. KalamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Kalam, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging offences under several sections of the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleges that he established physical relations with a 16‑year‑old informant on the pretext of marriage and later refused to solemnise the marriage, constituting rape and other offences. The petitioner contended that the allegations were fabricated, that the relationship was consensual over two years, and that no offence was committed. The State opposed bail, highlighting the specific accusations, the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S., and the victim’s minor age. Considering the seriousness of the charges, the direct nature of the accusation, and the victim’s age, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged offences under the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act
  • Whether the alleged consensual relationship with a minor amounts to rape under the applicable statutes

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • rape
  • POCSO Act
  • minor victim
  • criminal procedure
  • false allegations

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78160 of 2025

                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2025 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Kalam S/o- Md. Manjoor R/v- Baldhiha, W.No-1, Ps- Jaynagar Dist-
                 Madhubani

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X D/o- Y R/v- Baldhiha W.No-1, Ps- Jaynagar Dist- Madhubani

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :       Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
                                                 Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   21-04-2026                    Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                  2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 115(2),

                   110, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 and 6 of

                   the POCSO Act.

                                  3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this

                   petitioner established physical relations with the informant on

                   the pretext of marriage and thereafter, refused to solemnize

                   marriage.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78160 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

          committed no offence. The entire prosecution case, as set out in

          the F.I.R., is out and out false, fabricated and concocted and

          both of them enjoyed each others company for two long years. It

          is further submitted that only because the relationship could not

          continue and failed, the same does not amount to rape.

          Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

                       5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to

          the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

          and there is specific accusation that on the pretext of marriage,

          he established physical relations with the informant on various

          occasions and thereafter, refused to solemnize marriage. The

          victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S. has supported the prosecution case. The learned trial

          court has assessed the age of victim as 16 years.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence,

          statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the

          B.N.S.S. and age of the victim, the prayer for grant of
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78160 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.