Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Azad AnsariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court confirmed the provisional bail previously granted to the petitioner.

Summary

Azad Ansari, an 18‑year‑old, was charged under Sections 64, 123 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly exploiting a 19‑year‑old girl by promising marriage. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the alleged victim was a major and that both parties were in a consensual relationship. The State opposed bail, relying on the FIR allegations. The Court considered the ages of the parties, the nature of their relationship, and the fact that provisional bail had already been granted on 03‑12‑2025. It confirmed the provisional bail, thereby disposing of the bail application.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged exploitation under the B.N.S. and POCSO statutes

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • sexual exploitation
  • false promise of marriage
  • B.N.S.
  • POCSO
  • minor
  • provisional bail
  • criminal law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83694 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- BHITAHA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Azad Ansari Son of Murtuza Ansari R/o Village - Gulhariya Pali Tola, P.S. -
                 Bhitaha, Dist. - West Champaran, Bettiah.
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     X D/o Y R/o Village - Gulhariya Pali Tola, P.S. - Bhitaha, Dist. - Bihtaha,
                  Dist. - West Champaran, Bettiah.
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Khushi Awadh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   20-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Despite valid service of notice, none appears on

                   behalf of the opposite party no.2.

                                   2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Sections 64, 123 and 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

                                   3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has

                   alleged that the petitioner had been exploiting her for the past

                   three years on the false promise of marriage.

                                   4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits, at

                   the outset, that the victim/informant is a major girl of 19 years of

                   age as would be evident from her date of birth certificate from the

                   Madarsa Register, a mention of which finds in paragraph nos.7

                   and 8 of the petition. Further, she was in a love relationship with

                   the petitioner, who is also a young boy aged about 18 years and

                   the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83694 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      B.N.S.S. also indicates that she was known to the petitioner for

                      the past three years and there were talks of marriage between

                      them and it was she who had administered medicine for making

                      her family sleep, whereafter some physical relationship was

                      established between them. Her main grievance is that the

                      marriage between them is not being materialized. The petitioner

                      is in custody since 17.09.2025 with clean antecedent, however,

                      provisional bail was granted to him by a Co-ordinate Bench of

                      this Court vide order dated 03.12.2025.

                                      5. Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of

                      bail on the basis of allegation made in the First Information

                      Report.

                                   6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances

                      and considering the age of both the petitioner and the

                      victim/informant and also considering the relationship between

                      them as per her own statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S,

                      the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated

                      03.12.2025 is hereby confirmed.

                                   7. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.



                                                (Soni Shrivastava, J)
anand/-
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.