Patna High Court
Md. RajulversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court dismissed the second anticipatory bail application, holding that once a charge‑sheet is filed and the earlier anticipatory bail condition is triggered, a fresh anticipatory bail cannot be entertained.
Summary
Petitioner Md. Rajul feared arrest in a case involving offences under several IPC sections and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. He had earlier obtained anticipatory bail on 1‑10‑2024, conditioned on its lapse if a charge‑sheet were filed. After the charge‑sheet was submitted, the earlier anticipatory bail ceased to operate. The petitioner then filed a second anticipatory bail application, which the State opposed, arguing that he must now surrender and seek regular bail. The court, accepting the State's submission, declined to entertain the fresh anticipatory bail plea and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Can a fresh anticipatory bail be granted after a charge‑sheet is filed when the earlier anticipatory bail order has become ineffective?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 376, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- charge-sheet
- Indian Penal Code
- POCSO Act
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88622 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2024 Thana- Bathnaha District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Rajul S/o- Md. Sulaiman @ Gulpa Village- Fena Behali Ward No- 19
Bathnaha, PS-Bathnaha District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/o Y Village- Fena Behali Ward No- 12 Bathnaha, PS-Bathnaha District-
Araria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vivekanand Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 65 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506 and
34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
2. The learned APP, at the outset, submits that
petitioner was granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by an
order dated 1-10-2024 in Cr. Misc no. 60768 of 2024 with a
condition that if charge-sheet is submitted connecting the
petitioner with the offence, in that event, the anticipatory bail
order shall lose its effect. The learned APP next submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88622 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
2/2
charge-sheet has been submitted as such the anticipatory bail
granted to the petitioner earlier loses its effect in terms of the
order dated 1-10-2024 in Cr. Misc no. 60768 of 2024. It is also
submitted that petitioner now should surrender and seek regular
bail.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned APP.
4. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to entertain the second anticipatory bail
application.
5. Accordingly, the second anticipatory bail
application is dismissed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…